Canadi anJ ournal of Pol i t i cal and

Soci al Theory
Revuecanadi ennedet ht sorl e pol i t i que et
soci al e
Edi t or/ REdact eur
Art hur Kroker ( Pol i t i cal Sci ence, Wi nni peg)
Managi ngEdi t or/ R6dact ri ce onchef
Mari l oui se Kroker
Associ at eEdi t or/ REdact eur adj oi nt
Al ki s Kont os ( Pol i t i cal Economy, Toront o)
Revi ewEdi t or/ R6dact eur des recensi ons
Al l en Mi l l s ( Pol i t i cal Sci ence, Wi nni peg)
Advi sory Board/ Coml t 6 consul t at i f
Ben Agger
( Soci ol ogy, Wat erl oo), Howard Ast er
( Pol i t i cal
Sci ence, McMast er),
Phi l l i p Hansen ( Pol i t i cal St udi es, Mani t oba), Kennet h J . Hughes ( Canadi an
Li t erat ure, Mani t oba), Wi l l i am Lei ss ( Pol i t i cal Sci ence and Envi ronment al
St udi es, York), J ames Moore ( Pol i t i cal Sci ence, Concordi a), Ray Morrow
( Soci ol ogy, Mani t oba), Mark Novak( Soci ol ogy, Wi nni peg), RodPreece( Pol i t i cal
Sci ence, Wi l f ri d
Lauri er), HenryVel t meyer
( Soci ol ogy,
St . Mary' s), Davi d
Wal ker
( Pol i t i cal Sci ence, Wi nni peg), DeenaWei nst ei n
( Soci ol ogy, DePaul ), Mi chael A
.
Wei nst ei n ( Pol i t i cal
Sci ence, Purdue), Davi d N. Wei sst ub ( Osgoode Hal l Law
School , York),
Cl audi a
A.
Wri ght
( Pol i t i cal
Sci ence,
Wi nni peg) .
The Canadi an J ournal of Pol i t i cal and
Soci al Theory i s
a
ref ereed,
i nt erdi sci pl i naryrevi ewpubl i shedt ri annual l y- Wi nt er, Spri ng- SummerandFal l .
Annual Subscri pt i on Rat es : I ndi vi dual s, $10
. 00
; St udent s,
$7. 00
; I nst i t ut i ons,
$15. 00. Si ngl e Copi es, $5. 00. Pl easeadd$2. 00ext raper year f or post age
out si de
of Canada. / La Revuecanadi ennedet hdori e pol i t i que
et
soci al e
est une
revue
i nt erdi sci pl i nai re dont t out art i cl e publ i 6 est choi si par un j ury de l ect eurs
i nd6pendant s . El l eest publ i d- e t roi s f oi s par an- enhi ver, au pri nt emps- 6t e et en
aut omne. Abonnement annuel - $10. 00;
et udi ant s, $7. 00;
i nst i t ut i on, $15
. 00. Le
num6ro - $5. 00. Aj out er $2
. 00 de
f rai s
post aux pour abonnement A
I ' 6t ranger .
Edi t ori al and busi ness correspondence shoul d be sent t o Prof essor Art hur
Kroker, Depart ment of Pol i t i cal Sci ence, TheUni versi t yof Wi nni peg, 515 Port age
Avenue, Wi nni peg, Mani t oba, Canada, R3B2E9. Aut hors are request edt of orward
t hree
copi es of t he manuscri pt and t o provi de sel f - addressed envel opes wi t h
correct
post age. Foot not es shoul d be assembl ed on separat e sheet s. / Tout e
correspondencedoi t et re
adressde
au prof esseur Art hur Kroker,
D6part ement de
Sci ence
Pol i t i que, Uni versi t y de Wi nni peg, Mani t oba, Canada, R3B2E9. On
demandeaux col l aborat eurs d' envoyer t roi s exempl ai res del eur manuscri t et de
l es accompagner d' uneenvel oppet i mbreeet adresseea I ' expddi t eur . Les not es
doi vent t i t re dact yl ographi ees sur des f eui l l es separees A l a f i n deI ' art i cl e.
Correspondi ng address f or Revi ews : Prof essor Al l en Mi l l s, Depart ment of
Pol i t i cal Sci ence, t he Uni versi t y
of
Wi nni peg,
515
Port age Avenue, Wi nni peg,
Mani t oba R3B 2E9. / Adresse A l aquel i t f aut envoyer l es compt es rendus :
Prof esseur Al l en Mi l l s, Depart ement de Sci ence Pol i t i que, Uni versi t y de
Wi nni peg, Wi nni peg, Mani t oba,
R3B2E9
.
TheJ ournal acknowl edges wi t hgrat i t udet hegenerous assi st anceof t heCanada
Counci l andt heMani t obaArt s Counci l / Les r6dact eurs t i ennent 8 expri mer l our
reconnal sanceauConsei l des Art s duCanadaet auConsei l des Art s duMani t oba.
I ndexed i n/ I ndi x6e au: I nt ernat i onal Pol i t i cal Sci ence Abst ract s/ Document at i on
pol i t i que i nt ernat i onal e; Soci ol ogi cal Abst ract s I nc .
Member of t heMani t obaI ndependent Publ i shers' Associ at i on andt he Canadi an
Peri odi cal Publ i shers' Associ at i on.
GTous droi t s r6serves 1978, Canadi anJ ournal of Pol i t i cal andSoci al Theory,
I nc . / Revuecanadi ennedet h6ori e pol i t i que et soci al e, Lt 6e.
I SSN0380- 9420
Canadi an
J ournal
of Pol i t i cal
andSoci al
Theory
Revuecanadi enne
det heori e
pol i t i que et soci al e
Fal l / Aut omne

Vol ume2: Number
3
Cont ent s/ Sommai re
Post - Cart esi an Transf ormat i ons : The
Cl oud of Knowi ng
5
J ohann W. Mohr
Needs, Exchanges and
t he Fet i shi smof Obj ect s 27
Wi l l i amLei ss
The Legacy of Pol i t i cal Economy:
Thi nki ng Wi t hand
49
Agai nst Cl aus Of f e
J ohn Keane
Machi avel l i and Gui cci ardi ni
: Anci ent s and Moderns
93
J . G. A
. Pocock
Hegel on Possessi on and Propert y 111
F. R. Cri st i
Revi ewArt i cl es/ Compt es rendus
Carl Schmi t t Conf ront s t he Engl i sh- Speaki ngWorl d 125
J oseph W. Bendersky
The Soci al Li mi t s of Bourgeoi s Democracy
137
Davi d P. Shugarman
Si x Charact ers Out of Cont ext 144
Ri chardRoyal
Cel ebrat i ons i n Exi l e
145
Art hur Kroker
Hayek' s Resi dual Pl at oni sm 156
Ri chard Vernon
The Moral i t y of Law 163
Cl ayt on J ones
Books Recei ved/ Li vres regus
175
I ndex t o Vol ume 11 178
Canadi an J ournal of
Pol i t i cal
and
Soci al Theory/ Revue canadi enne de
t heori epol i t i que
et soci al e, Vol . 2, No. 3 ( Fal l / Aut omne 1978) .
POST-CARTESI AN
TRANSFORMATI ONS:
THECLOUDOF
KNOWI NG
CAUTI ON:
J ohann W. Mohr
DONOTREAD. Wal kt hrought het ext as youwoul dt hrough
t hest reet s of aci t y, or ont hebeachor i n f act
anywhere. I f some
t hi ng at t ract s you, st op and
l ook; i f not , wal k on. You can
al ways come back.
Thesequent i al numbers are addresses onl y.
DONOTUNDERSTAND
.
St and
i f you pl ease and l et your
t hought s and memori es speak
. Thi s i s not a hi st ory, t here i s no
order i n t i me. Thi s i s not even ast ory, t herei s no poi nt - onl y
vi st as, no bui l d-up - onl y bui l di ngs. Hopef ul l y chi l dren st i l l
pl ay games t here.
I .

HI DE
AND
SEEK
Andhesai d, I heardt hy voi ce i n t he garden, and
I was
af rai d, because I was naked, and
I
hi d mysel f
.
( Genesi s 3, 10)
1
. 1

Nakedness
hi des
af t er
havi ng known. The f i ni t ude of desi re i s
i nt ol erabl e i n t he f ace of i nf i ni t y. Fi ni t ude i s t ol erabl e onl y i n af f i ni t y. We
appear i n af f i ni t y anddi sappear i n i nf i ni t y. Language al l ows us t o hi deandt o
cal l f ort h, but t he word i s beyond
def i ni t i on
.
1 . 2

What we must hi de f rom, wemust hi de f romeach ot her
. Man
al one,
we have been
cryi ng f or years, i t seems ages, i t seems our whol e t i me i s
enshrouded i n i t . Andbecausei t seems so, i t i s so. Thecry has manyf orms,
most of t hemsoundl ess .
JOHANNW. MOHR
1 . 3

Manal one, t he desi r e whendesi r e i s spent af t er knowi ng. Onl y i n
hi di ng can we hi de what we know. But hi di ng our sel ves needs el abor at e
gar ment s t o hi de our di smember ment . Knowi ngdi smember ment i s anxi et y,
Angst , and so we
huddl e t oget her ( see our ci t i es, see Jane see) ; t r agedy i s
t he
bl eat i ng of goat s .
1 . 4

Hi st or y moves f or ever beyond t he i nt er sect i onof knownsi gns . What
r epeat s i t sel f i s what di d not happen, what was hi ddenbyappear ance. Onl y i n
cer t ai n moment s, or act s, or wor ds i s t he di vi si onbet weenhi ddenness and
appear ance suspended and t heysi gni f yeach ot her . Onl y t heni s t he hi ddenno
l onger t he deni ed, t he r epr essed hi st or y whi ch haunt s us but t he memor y
whi ch r e- member s us .
1 . 5

Hi st or y i s t he hi gh st or y of our est r angement i n t he mi nd, t he hi di ng
pl ace. Descr i pt i ons of what i s and what has beenand what shal l be and what i s
el sewher e emmanat e f r omt he st r anger . Madness i s onl ypossi bl e i naposi t i ve
wor l d whi ch hi des t he r esent ment of hi st or y; t he i n- di vi dual hi des t he
di vi dual , t he mi nd hi des t he body.
1 . 6

Becomi ng i s di s- cover i ng t he chi l d one has not been. The chi l d t hat
f ul l y i s, i s l ost . The t r ansmi ssi onbet weengener at i ons and t he t r ansmi ssi on
bet weenages i s of t hat whi ch has not been. What has not beeni s
t he f ut ur e, t he
condi t i onal past , ` i t coul d have been' as ` i t
shal l be' , t he nat ur e of t he
i mper at i ve ` Be! ' .
1 . 7

Chr i st i ani t y i s r oot ed i nt he body. Thi s i s mybodyand t hi s i s mybl ood.
The cr uci f i xi on i s acr uci f i xi onof t he body event hough t he r esur r ect i onmay
wel l be mor e. Remember i ngand member shi p i s i nt he shar i ng of t he bodyand
t he bl ood.
1 . 8

The body, our mani f est par t i cul ar . Ever y st ep f r omt he body i s ast ep
i nt o t he gener al . But body t oo canbe gener al i zed i nbody management f r om
medi ci ne t o sex educat i on t o t r anqui l i zer s and deodor i zer s . Li ke a
pat i ent
et her i zed upona t abl e.
1 . 9

Good and
evi l l i ke appear ance and hi ddenness i s azer o sumgame. The
mor e
cl ai ms we
make onbecomi ngbet t er , t he mor e we ascr i be evi l t o ot her s .
The mor e we i nsi st ondoi nggood, t he mor e evi l must i nf act appear t o
keep
t he equat i on i n bal ance. Good and
evi l cannot be i nput measur es, onl y
out come measur es - non- r edepl oyabl e. Good and
evi l i s not what we ar e, but
what we
ar e i n. Per f ect i oni s t he end of t i me.
THECLOUDOFKNOWING
2. 1

Deus abscondi t us, mundusi n or bi t ,
t he ego spl i t f r omt hesumi n whi ch
i t has
been cont ai ned
.
Wehave gone out ( ex- i r e) and exi st ence can onl y be
mai nt ai ned i n t he mi r r or , t he
l ooki ng gl ass. Radi cal doubt ext ended beyond
Decar t es' i magi nat i on. Li f e, one' s l i f e, a pr oj ect ( pr oj et ) , st r uct ur eat wi l l f r om
dest r uct i on of bei ng.
Man
i s
r ebor n i n power beyond knowl edge.
2. 2

Ego ( 1 824) i s der i ved f r omegoi sm( 1 785) al r eady gener al i zed f r om
egoi st e ( 1 755) . Moder ni t y becomes possi bl e i n t he cent r al i t y of t he ego. The
i ndi vi dual and t he a- t omos ar e no l onger unspl i t t abl e.
2. 3

Ego and i dent i t y, ar r i ved at by def i ni t i on f r omt hei r boundar y, bor der ,
box and
pr i son. Li enat i on not t o gr ound but t o boundar y becomes al i enat i on.
Under st andi ngbecomes st andi ng
agai nst , obst at ; i n i ncr easi ng r esent ment -
t hr owi ng agai nst , obj ect i ng, obj ect i vi t y, obj ect . Ident i f y as t ask and
def i ni t i on; ego i n spl endi d i sol at i on.
2. 4

And
yet : One shoul d bot h t ake
t o hear t ( say) and t hank ( t hi nk) t hat
bei ng
i s ( Par meni des/ Hei degger ) .
Bei ng
i s,
exi st ence appear s. Why mor e?
Cor por a sunt
( i f
i t has t o
be sai d t hat bodi es ar e) but why t he empt y
af f i r mat i on t hat deus est ( t hat God i s wi t hout doubt ) and t heempt i er oneof
ego sumcogi t ans t hat I ami n my mi nd and no l onger when out of my mi nd?
2. 5

1 ambecause I make mysel f up . I ammake- bel i eve as mi r r or ed by t he
mi nd. Is- ness i s no l onger f or i t sel f but f or me. TheI ami s t he I i s and t he It i s
t he It am. The bi r t h of subj ect i vi t y whi ch subj ect s t he I amt o t he mi nd and
obj ect i vi t y whi ch makes t he ot her ( and t he sel f ) i nt o my obj ect , my obj ect i on.
2. 6

The` i t am' r ever ber at es i n t he i d and t he' l
i s'
i n t he
super ego . Das Es,
das Ich and das f i ber - i ch. Das Es i s ` t he i t ' ( Engl i sh sensi bi l i t i es sof t ened t hei t
t o t he i d, anot her Ger man f or mat i on [Wei ssman 1 893] denot i ngger mpl asm
or i di opl asm) , das Ich i s ` t he I' capt ur ed i n ` t he ego' t o t amet he
embar r assi ng
Fr eud. Das f i ber - i ch, t he ` over I' gl or i f i ed as ` super ego' ( whi ch Fr eud di d not
use ver y of t en)
i s super onl y f or t he ego i n Ego- psychol ogy.
2. 7

Onl y i n a Car t esi an conver si on ( whi ch Fr eud set out t o over come) do
t hi ngs of t he
body becomeego syst ems, as st r uct ur e, t opol ogy and hi er ar chy.
JOHANNW.
MOHR
I t i s s ai d t hat wear e
dr i ven by our dr i ves and bounded by our cons ci ence. But
ar e our dr i ves , our des i r es l i mi t l es s ? Onl y i n t he mi nd . The mi nd hi des t he
l i mi t s of t hebody' s des i r es whi ch ar es oon s pent . Wear ebound
and bounded
by t hebody. Cons ci ence( con- s ci ence) can hi det hepr i mar y i ns ul t and i nj ur y
t o t heego, t hebody' s l i mi t ed pot ency and pot ent i al i t y. Cons ci ence
as
capi t al
t o mai nt ai n des i r e i n t he mi nd ; s uper - ego as aut hor i t y
under condi t i ons of
s car ci t y,
a
s er vi ce
s t at i on f or t heego as nar ci s s us . Appol l o hi des t hel i mi t s of
Di onys os .
2. 8

The s pl i t t i ng of t he I - t hou f r omt he I - i t ( Buber ) , a l at e and f ai l i ng
humani s m, f ai l i ngt odi s t i ngui s h bet weennar ci s s i s mand r ecogni t i on, bet ween
r ef l ect i on
medi at ed by t hemi r r or and r ef l ect i on i n knowi ng t heot her nes s of
t he ot her
and t he l i mi t s of t he bounded body.
2. 9

Cogni t i on
t r ans f or ms i s - nes s i nt o I i s , t hes ubj ect i nt o t heobj ect whi ch
exi s t s as a
pr oj ect . Ges t al t ps ychol ogy
has
s hown
not hi ng
mor e t han
t he
i nat t ent i on i n our t i me, t hepr edomi nanceof as s umpt i on over appear ance, t he
pr ecept over t he per cept . Ges t al t and i dea can onl y appear i n s peed, i n t he
gl os s , i n cogni t i on whi ch
bounds
r ecogni t i on, i n met hod ( t he way beyond) ,
whi ch bounds t heor y( t hegaze) , whi ch
i s
t ur ned i n on i t s el f . The
s peed
r eader ' s
dr eam. I amokay you ar e okay.
3. 1

Br eat hi ng ( ps ychei n) t he s t eadi es t exchange wi t h t he wor l d. Not t o
br eat he, not t o br eat he f r eel y t he gr eat anxi et y
.
The s i gh, an i nor di nat e
amount of br eat h t aken i n and r el eas ed ; i n cr yi ng, br eat h t aken i n r el uct ant l y
and s t accat o and pus hed- out t he s ame. way. i n t hes ob_ or us ed f or t he cr y.
3. 2

To cr y ( qui r i t ar e) t o i mpl or et heai d of ci t i zens ; t heanxi et y not t o bea
ci t i zen, not t o beembedded i n t het aken
f or gr ant ed, t hecr y i n t hewi l der nes s
wi t hout human echo. When di d cr yi ng
becomepr i vat e and s hamef ul ? When
di d t heevocat i on
and
i nvocat i on of ot her s becomean i nj ur y t o t heegor at her
t han t heheal i ng of t hes el f ? Thef r eecr yi ng of t heGr eek her o i s l ong behi nd us .
3. 3

I dent i t y has r epl aced s ens i bi l i t y . I dent i t y ( i dem) t heet er nal r ecur r ence
of t he s ame makes s ci ence pos s i bl eand t echnol ogy and s t r uct ur e as
t hei dol .
Sens i bi l i t y i s - of t hes ens es r oot ed i n t hebody as
humans ar er oot ed i n humus .
Thet i l l i ng of t hi s s oi l i s cul t ur e ( col er e)
. Nat ur ei s onl y nat us , bei ng bor n i nt o
t hi s wor l d ( wer - el d
- t heageof man, t hecour s eof t i me) . I dent i t y i s s amenes s ;
di f f er enceonl y
i t s
count er - meas ur e, i t s mi r r or . Changei s madnes s and i nj ur y
THECLOUDOF
KNOWING
( Indo- European *mei - t he root of change; Lat i n mut are - change and
i nj ury) . What a hi st ory and spect rummadness has, f romwi l d ent husi asm
and
desi re t o f ury and anger and f ool i shness uncont rol l ed by reason. Onl y now
subst ant i ve
and adverb comi ng f roma verb of def i ni t i ve act i on.
3. 4

Ident i t y, st eri l i zed
and f rozen madness, ego t he great st eri l i zer . Even
Freud, t he magni f i cent ( t hough i ncompl et e)
breach wi t h Decart es, has been
brought back i nt o t he servi ce of t he ego. The
onl y l egi t i mat e f uror l ef t i s t he
f uror
t herapeut i cus, t he f rant i c act i vi t y of st eri l i zi ng t he ret urn of t he
repressed. The l i vi ng
god,
who
breat hes i n humus and cul t ure becomes t he
deus ex machi na who i s dead
. The ego shoul d now be prot ect ed f romHi s
i nf i ni t e i nj ury . Why does
t he body st i l l cry?
II . BLINDMAN' SBUFF
But J onah roseupt of f ee unt o Tarshi shf romt hepresence
of t he Lordandwent downt o J oppa; andhef oundashi p
goi ng t o Tarshi sh; so he pai d t hef are t hereof , andwent
down i nt o i t , t o go wi t h t hemunt o Tarshi sh f romt he
presence of
t he Lord.
( J onah
1, 3)
4. 1

Let us begi n agai n. Why? Because not t o begi n i s i mpossi bl e
; i t i s
i mpossi bl e t o do not hi ng, even not hi ng must
be
done
whenone i s . Is t hi s a
ground f or begi nni ng? There are onl y t wo grounds : necessi t y
anddesi re. To
begi n i n necessi t y ends i n t he wi l l t o power . To begi n i n desi re ends i n
knowl edge. Necessi t y i s naked, desi re i s hi dden. Knowl edge. seeks power i n
common corrupt i on, i n t he servi ce of t he ego, t he repl acement f or t he Deus
abscondi t us, t he
hi dden god nowl egal l y decl ared dead.
4 . 2

Hol derl i n sawt he
gods
dyi ng, Ni et zsche
si gned t he deat h cert i f i cat e
and Hei degger di d not t al k about i t any more. Al l t hree
rai sed i n J erusal em,
emi grat ed t o At hens .
Hol derl i n' s search f or t he puri t y of man. Puni shment :
40
years i n
hi di ng.
He di d not go gent l y i nt o t he ni ght .
Ni et zsche sawt hat man, as hehadbecome,
coul d not be. Ecce Homo,
t he f l bermensch as
Unt ermensch. Man as mast er and sl ave had t o be
overcome. Puni shment
: 1 I years' si l ence.
JOHANNW. MOHR
Hei degger became gui l t y by associ at i on
( wi t h t he Unt er mensch as
Cber mensch) and accept ed hi s own bani shment i nt o bei ng f or l i f e.
4
. 3

The spi r i t of r evenge: my f r i ends, t hat was unt i l nowman' s best
r ef l ect i on; and wher e t her e was suf f er i ng t her e
wi l l al ways be puni shment
( Ni et zsche, On Del i ver ance) . Wher e i d
[ i t ] was, ego shal l be.
4. 4

The
f ur i es ar e t he
pr i ce
At hens pai d f or
t he
i dea,
t he
i ndependent
exi st ence. Jer usal emkept t he covenant t hat vengeance was Hi s and was
pr eser ved f r omt ot al dest r uct i on al t hough cont i nuousl y dest r oyed as a
r emi nder . Madness i s Gr eek, deat h i t s Hebr ewequi val ent . ( Thanat os -a
l i ngui st i c cover -up) . Onl y Chr i st opens Jer usal emt o madness and cur e
.
John
of
t he
Gospel becomes John of
t he Revel at i on and t he r evenge i s f i er ce. The
onl y
madness amongt he Hebr ews i s
t he Messi ah bef or e t he end of t i me. The
gr aven i mage i s f or bi dden, t he Name must r emai n
hi dden .
5. 1

I dent i t y and sensi bi l i t y, t he mi nd and t he body, t he gener al and t he
par t i cul ar , t he moment umand t he moment . Taki ng Deus est and cor por a
sunt f or gr ant ed t hr ows t he r adi cal doubt back on t he sum, t he I am. I f we
const i t ut e our sel ves i n cogi t at i on ( i n l ogi c and st r uct ur e) t hen t he wor l d t oo i s
r econst i t ut ed as l ogi c and st r uct ur e, as sci ence and t echnol ogy. Const i t ut i on
becomes i nst i t ut i on.
5. 2

The nat ur e of t he sumwhi ch i s const i t ut ed ( i nst i t ut ed)
by cogi t o was
r e-exami ned by Husser l . But sumhad al r eady become t he ego
and t he onl y
way out ( but not i n) was t he t r anscendent al ego
.
The
t hi ngs t hemsel ves had
al r eady become t hei r st r uct ur e, and i nt ent i onal i t y coul d f i nal l y onl y be
pur i f i ed i n t he ei det i c i mage, si gni f i cat i on wi t hout si gn, syst emcl osed.
5. 3

Cogi t o al so const i t ut es ( i nst i t ut es) t he obj ect .
Phenomenol ogy
i l l u-
mi nat es i t sel f i n t he subj ect / obj ect di chot omy. I t r ecover s
( r e-cover s?)
t he
subj ect i n r el at i on t o t he obj ect . Exi st ent i al i sm( t o use t hese gener al i zed si gns
i n gener al i zed t i mes) gr ounds t he obj ect ed subj ect and subj ect ed obj ect i n
appar ent exper i ence ( Dasei n) at t empt i ng t o r ecapt ur e a l i nger i ng pr e-
Car t esi an
memor y of bei ngi n
al l
t he not hi ngness of t he st er i l i zed ego ( Sar t r e)
and of Godi n what i s st i l l l ef t t o bei ng, despai r ( Ki er kegaar d) . Pr e-Car t esi an
becomes
pr e-Socr at i c i n t he sear ch f or f ur t her f r agment s of memor y bef or e
t he mi nd
( Hei degger ) .
THECLOUDOFKNOWING
6. 1

Whenal l t hi ngs began,
t he
word
al ready was. Theword dwel t wi t h
Godandwhat Godwas, t hewordwas.
Thewordt henwas wi t hGodat t he
begi nni ng andt hroughhi mal l t hi ngs came
t obe; nosi ngl et hi ng was creat ed
wi t hout hi m. Al l t hat camet obewas
al i vewi t hhi s l i f e andt hat l i f ewas t he
l i ght of men. (J ohn1, 2- 4)
6. 2

Thebl unt assert i oni s : Int hebegi nni ngwas t hewordandt hewordwas
wi t hGodandGodwas t heword. (J ohn1, 1) Andt hewordwasmadef l eshand
dwel t amongus. (J ohn1, 14)
6. 3

Thewordi s wi t ht henamet hat must not benamed. Youmayreadi n
bet ween(i nt er- l egere) as youmaybei nbet ween(i nt er- esse) .
Thel i ght
i s
i nt he
spacecarved out by t hel et t ers and
bet weent hel i nes. Every wordi t s own
t ransl at i onmanyf ol dover. Fi nnegan' s wakeat t hebi rt hof t heword.
Thewordbecamef l eshandt hef l esht hrought hesenses (t hedoors of
percept i onand concept i on) becomes wordas cal l wordandcal l i ng, address
andspeech(mot , parol e, verbe) ; I say unt o you.
6. 4

Beyondt hewordt hei nf i ni t ecal cul us sedi ment s i nt o sci ence. Beyond
t he f l esh t he Gol em; t he non- humanmade humanbecomes i nhuman.
Const i t ut i onas i nst i t ut i on, cl ock- work orange, t hesel f - regul at i ng machi ne,
t he
syst em.
6. 5

To humani zesyst ems
i s
t o syst emat i zehumans, i s t o deny ot herness
andest rangement of i nst i t ut i ons andt hest at e. Thest at ewi t hers awayi nt he
corporat i on as t he corporat i on must wi t her away i n t hebody. Nei t her
exi st ent i al i smnor marxi smcanbea humani sm; no ' i sm' canbehuman.
Humani smi s ant hropomorphi sm, i s narci ssi smwheni t ext ends beyondt he
body.
6. 6

Tot urnf l eshi nt o meat i s obscene. Onl y t hef l eshcanbeknown. The
ego cogi t at es t heobj ect . Canni bal i sm, prost i t ut i onandi ncest areobscene
onl y
as narci ssi smor obj ect i f i cat i on.
Thi s i s mybody, f l esht obeeat en. Sarahprost i t ut ed Hagar but Hagar
al so becamet hemot her of generat i ons . Lot ' s daught ers concei ved of t hei r
f at her af t er Sodom, wheremenwant edt o knowt hevi si t i ng angel s.
JOHANNW. MOHR
6. 7

The cor por at i on, t he body ( cor pus) gener al i zed. Theego as
opus, as
syst em of t hought . And t hought as syst em, as Summa,
as Levi at han, as
Cr i t i que beyond al l Reason, as Encycl opedi a. Bet ween Bei ng and
Not hi ngness, Bei ng and Ti me t he Di al ogues become t ext s and t he wor d
i s
f r ozen. Man desi r es by nat ur e t o know( Ar i st ot l e) but knowl edge syst ema-
t i zed f r eezes t hewor di nt o concept , r eadyf or ar t i f i ci al i nsemi nat i on. Thest or y
becomes hi st or y.
6. 8

Ever y t hr owof t he di ce i s a newpossi bi l i t y un- det er mi ned
by al l
pr evi ous t hr ows ; andyet t hei r ser i es wi l l be a known or der . The mol ecul e i n
r andommovement unpr edi ct abl e and yet measur abl e as mass . Pr obabi l i t y
appr oaches cer t ai nt y t hr ough i ncr easi ng consi st ency and massi f i cat i on.
Deat h of t he mul t i t udes i s i nsur abl e and so ar e acci dent s . Howmanywi l l di e
i n t hi s ci t y t hi s year ? Theact uar i ans ar e r ar el y wr ong. When wi l l I di e? Who
knows?
7 . 1

To bei n one' s bodyi s t o desi r e t o know. To be
shut
up i n
t he mi ndi s t o
beout of one' s mi nd. Themi ndi s what wemi ndandwhat mi nds us . What r e-
mi nds us i s exper i ence negat ed. The sel f whi ch mi nds i t sel f f r eezes i n t he
mi r r or . Theunknown i n t he equat i on r epl aced by i t sel f di ssol ves i nt o zer o.
7 . 2

Exper i encei s i n- di vi dual ; man can bedi vi dedi n manyways. What ever
we may be, we l i ve t he exper i ences we have not l i ved, and wel i ve i n t he
exper i ences we have l i ved. Our exper i ences ar e our memor y whi ch r e-
member s
us . Exper i encei s t he body r emember ed;
t he
mi ndonl y r emi nds us .
Socr at es, t he gr eat
r emi nder , became a memor y t hr ough
t he deat h of t hi s
body. Pl at o was t hen bound and f r eed t o deny t he body and t o r ecr eat e
t he wor l d i n t he mi nd, a wor l dwhi chAr i st ot l e t hen cal l ed nat ur e
. But physi s
has nowt ur ned i nt o physi cs, const i t ut i on i nt o i nst i t ut i on,
seei ng i nt o
t heor y,
bei ng i nt o f or m. Theway backt o t he bodybl ockedbyt hedeat hof Socr at es,
r epr essed as cal ami t y, t he waybeyond( met a- odos) const r i ct ed by st r uct ur e.
Physi cs i s met a- physi s; met aphysi cs i s t he way i nt o nowher e, i nt o
not hi ngness . Logos
( t he wor l d) has t ur ned i nt o l ogi c .
7 . 3

Sensi bi l i t y and
exper i ence, t he bodyi n t ouch
. The mi nd i s t he l i mi t
of
t he body. Eachexper i ence i s l i mi t ed unt o i t sel f , i n- di vi dual ; i t can t r anscend
i t s l i mi t s
onl y i n t he mi nd, t heunl i mi t ed. Exper i encei s i n t he bodyas Pavl ov
r ecogni zed, a condi t i on si nequa non. The
body,
t he humancondi t i on si ne qua
non.
1 2
THECLOUDOFKNOWING
7. 4

Ast r uct ur e of exper i ence can onl y be cast i n t he mi nd. The bodyl i ke
t he wor d i s
f or ever pol ymor phous . What we mi nd ar e t he l i mi t s of our
exper i ences andt hei r i sol at i on. The mi ndandwhat we mi ndi s space andt i me
andt he body' s cont i ngency. The sent i ment of t he body i s r e- sent ment i n t he
mi nd. Bei ng- i n- t he- wor l d i s f or ever made t o not hi ngi n t he possi bi l i t i es of t he
mi nd andwhat may have been. Andt o be not hi ngedi s t he ul t i mat e despai r .
We have t o l i mi t t he mi nd whi ch i s i t sel f t he l i mi t l ess
l i mi t
of
t he
body.
7. 5

The body i n t he mi nd i s t he i dea, t he body' s per ver si on (Umkehr ) .
Per ver si on i s t he body i n t he mi nd r e- sent i ng t he l i mi t s of desi r e and
exper i ence. Logi c andst r uct ur e l i mi t r esent ment and st er i l i z e t he sel f (i di os)
i nt o t he i dea, t he pr i vat e (i di os) i nt o t he common. In- di vi dual exper i ences can
nowconnect , l i ke t r ai ns connect on a j our ney (Er - f ahr ung) accor di ngt o pl an
andl ogi st i cs ; t i me canbe cont r ol l edby t i met abl es andspace measur edbeyond
t he f oot whi ch wal ks and set s t he pace. The l i mi t s of t he body' s pace can be
sur passed wi t h ever - i ncr easi ng speeds ; t he sky i s no l onger t he l i mi t (and
heaven has di sappear ed) . The wal ker di d not have t o make connect i ons,
connect edness was i n t he wal k .
7 . 6

In t he mi nd st r uct ur e, exper i ence can be denudedf r omwhat i t has not
been. It can be st or ed f or saf ekeepi ng i n t he co- or di nat e syst emandt he
i nf i ni -
t esi mal cal cul us . The met aphor as anal ogue andt he l et t er as di gi t ; t he i dea as
i dol . Some voi ces r emai n, but Vi co' s ol d sci ence i s a dowdy const r uct i on,
Bl ake' s war ni ng a cur i osi t y. The Gol em' s mushr oomi s mi ght i er t han t he
cr oss . Space becomes out er space and t i me t he dyi ng of car bons . And
space/ t i me i s
speed
and t he
ul t i mat e speedi s t he di sappear ance of t he body,
t he mat t er whi ch mat t er s .
7. 7

Mi nd cont r ol i s not cont r ol over t he mi nd (t hi s i s i mpossi bl e, t he
i nf i ni t e cannot be cont r ol l ed) but cont r ol of t he mi nd. Mi nd cont r ol , a
t echni que t o i nst i t ut e
t he
i dea as i deol ogy, t he per ver t ed body as common
st r uct ur e, f i nal l y succeeds onl y i n t he t or t ur e of t he r eal body. School i ngdoes
not capt ur e t he mi nd, i t capt ur es t he body whi ch must submi t t o st r uct ur e as
t i met abl e and cl ass . Lawi s t he mai nt enance of t he mi nd' s or der as i deol ogy. It
t oo
mai nt ai ns i t sel f f i nal l y as t or t ur e
of
t he body.
III . EENY, MEANY, MONEY, MOE
CATCHHIMNAKEDBYTHETOE
AndI gave my hear t t o seek andsear ch out by wi sdom
1 3
JOHANNW. MOHR
concerni ng
al l t hi ngs t hat are done under heaven: t hi s
sore t ravai l hat h godgi ven t o t he sons of man
t o be
exerci sedt herewi t h. ( Eccl esi ast es 1, 13)
But put fort h t hi ne handnow, andt ouch hi s boneand
fl esh andhe wi l l curset hee t o t hyface. ( Job 2, 5)
8 . 1

Theori es arenot t hei nvent i onof sci ent i st s andphi l osophers . Themost
t heoret i cal occasi ons aret hebeer houset al k andt hemass ( si c! ) medi a. Theory
( l ong separat ed fromseei ng) has become t he redempt i on of sl aves and t he
promi sefor woul dbe mast ers . Thecat egory i s downi n t hemarket pl ace ( kat a
agora) .
8. 2

Typi ng i s t he t ransformat i on of t he body i nt o mi nd form, ( t he
pervert ed body) , t he t ransformat i on of t he wordi nt o l et t ers .
Let t ers as i deal
t ypes, as i deo- grammes, as t races of t he sel f. Thewordcan
onl yemanat efrom
a speaker . Cast i nt o t ype i t becomes i ndependant , t he
gol emt hat canl ast and
do hi s own work.
8. 3

Typi fi cat i on of humans, t hefoundat i onof egoandi dent i t y, t hegraven
i mage, t he i dol . Assembl age of pi eces whi ch are
easi l y exchangeabl e and
reduceabl e t o t he bi nary worl dof di gi t al comput ers .
8. 4

, Sci ence rest s onregul ari t y
andwheresci ence ends, t echnol ogy begi ns
t o ext end regul ari t y. Nat ure l i ke experi ence does not produce suffi ci ent
regul ari t y andpredi ct abi l i t y t o makeus safe. Sci ence compl et es i t sel f
( and
us)
i n t he model , t he syst em, i n st ruct ure and t ypi fi cat i on. I t s
reduct i on i s
reduct i on t o regul ari t y. The rarer t he event t he l ess i ncorporat edi n sci ence.
Chance i s syst emat i cal l y rul ed out i n t he order of one i n t went y, one i n a
hundred, one i n a t housand
. Event s bel owt hat order becomenon- event s i n
sci ence. Experi ence regi st ers event s of once.
8. 5

Sci ence covers i t s l i mi t s by t echnol ogy, t he expressi on of i t s arri ved
st ruct ure wi t hout i t s
search
;
human sci ence ful fi l l s i t sel f i n t ypol ogi es;
everybody as somebody as nobody
.
The rare event
i s excl udedandsi nce we
are t he most rare of al l event s weare al l excl uded. Wearet hechanceof onei n
bi l l i ons
. Weare t he wager .
8. 6

Theory and t ypol ogy are not i nvent i ons of
sci ence but our most
commonresponse t o our l i mi t s i n t he
face of
t he
unnameabl e; t he hi di ngof
our l i mi t s, t he cover t o our nakedness. Thet ransparent garment
of l anguage
1 4
THECLOUDOF
KNOWING
becomes armour t hrough sci ence. Human sci ence compl et es our
aspi rat i ons
as work
of t he st ranger, as seei ng out si de t he gaze; de- f i ni ng our f i ni t ude
.
8. 7

Human sci ence does not f i nd us, but our est rangement i n
t he mi nd. If
wecoul d f ace i t as our perversi on (Umkehr) i t coul d l ead us
backt ot he body.
But human sci ent i st s caught i n humani smrat her t han t he
human, share(wi t h
rare except i ons) i n t he conspi racy of vani t y. Fi ndi ngs,
hi di ng t he quest i on i n
t he answer,
becomerei f i ed, t heworl d (and t he word) become
reconst i t ut ed as
i nst i t ut i ons and t ypes. Idi os, (t hepri vat e, t hesel f ) whi ch
has been t ransf ormed
i nt o
t he i dea i n t he begi nni ng of sci ence i s f ashi oned
i nt o t he i deal t ype.
8. 8

Onl ynowcan webusy oursel ves wi t h psychol ogy
and
psychi at ry and
soci ol ogyand
ant hropol ogyt ore- f ormt heworl di n our own est ranged i mage.
Li t t l e men i n
whi t e coat s measuri ng behavi our, i n bl uecoat s t el l i ng us what
t o
do, i n bl ack ones
j udgi ng us and t he manygrey ones i n bet ween di rect i ngt he
paper:
Your name
Your address
Your sex (? )
Your
age
Anamnesi s and anal ysi s. The
st ory becomes hi st ory and sci ence posi t i ve. The
quest i on becomes t heanswer
and t hebody' s experi encecl assi f i ed i n st at i st i cal
st ruct ures. The average f ami l y has t woand a hal f
chi l dren, pi t yt he hal f one,
pi t y us al l . Where are t he dappl ed t hi ngs? (t he gl ory t o
God)?
9. 1

Angui sh comes i n curi ous ways and t hrough curi ous
messengers. And
curi ous i s a curi ous word because what i s at st ake i s curi osi t y.
Angui sh as
barred curi osi t y, angst and anger. Angui sh i s t hat i t coul d be ot herwi se
.
9. 2

Rat i onal i t y
and sci ence mi rrored by t he f acel ess crowd, t he f l eet i ng
passerby sensed
by Baudel ai re t hrough t he poppy, capt ured
by Poe i n t he
grot esque whi ch caught up wi t h
Benj ami n at t he Spani sh border .
9. 3

Sci ence as doxa conceal s t he paradoxa unt i l
t he measured worl d
breaks i n t he
absurd. The i nf i ni t y of t he mi nd and t he deat hof t he bodycan
onl y be i mperf ect l y
conceal ed byt he compul si on t o sci ence, l edegre zero, di e
1 5
JOHANNW. MOHR
ent zauber t e Wel t . Even t heor y el evat ed t o cr i t i cal t heor y and r ef l ex t o
r ef l ect i on cannot
escape t he cr i si s of
i nf i ni t e r egr essi on.
9. 4

Mar x t ur ned Hegel upsi de downt o st and hi mon
hi s f eet . ( Hegel asked
f or i t ) . Ki er kegaar d t ur ned Hegel upsi de down t o st and hi mon hi s head .
( Hegel
asked
f or i t ) . But howdi d Hegel st and? And wher e? You must
under st and: The Pr ussi an Mi ni st er of Cul t ur e
of f er ed
: 2000
Thal er and
Expenses . Hegel negot i at ed f ur t her assur ances on r ent , pr oduce and
l i f e
i nsur ance; l ect ur e f ees wer e good. So f ar Mar x i s vi ndi cat ed, t he body
wi ns;
but howcan t he st at e t hat f eeds us so wel l
wi t her away? The body i s pr i vat e
pr oper t y and t he means of pr oduct i on ( Fr eud) ;
onl y t he mi nd can be
nat i onal i zed. And t he st at e can no l onger be t ur ned
upsi de down ( Poor
Mar cuse) . And Ki er kegaar d st i l l st andi ng on hi s head di scomf or t i ng us .
I V. FROMBUI LDI NGBLOCKTOMECCHANOSET
And t he
whol e ear t h was of one l anguage and of one
speech. ( Genesi s
11, 1)
And t hey
sai d, Go t o, l et us bui l d a ci t y and a t ower ,
whose t op may r each unt o heaven; and l et us make a
name,
l est we
be scat t er ed abr oad upon t hef ace of t he
whol e ear t h. ( Genesi s, 11, 4)
10. 1

Fr omt he cat acomb
t o t he cat hedr al , f r omt he vaul t t o t he soar i ng
bank, t he out st andi ng i s t he out st andi ng. Savi our and savi ngs as
t r ust , as
sur pl us val ue and debt . The sacr ed and t he pr of ane, meani ng and meanness as
means .
10. 2

The money l ender ' s bench t hr own out of
t he t empl e becomes t he
t empl e. Monet a, goddess
and t empl e, st r uct ur i ng subst ance i n coi nage,
t r ansubst ant i at i on; t he pur e i dea f r omr ar e subst ance t o i mage and pr i nt , t o
el ect r oni c t r ansf er . The pr omi ssor y not e and t he pr omi sed l and, br i de pr i ce
and consi der at i on, cont r act and convenant .
10. 3

To have i s t o be had;
t o t ake i s t o be t aken and t o possess i s t o be
possessed; t he yi el d i s
gui l t . Usur y i s f or bi dden. To have an i nt er est i n what
one i s not i nt er est ed
i n, t o have a shar e i n what one does not shar e i s pur el y
f r omt he head -capi t al .
1 6
THECLOUDOFKNOWING
10
. 4
Capi tal i sm i s head- stuf f i s mi nd- stuf f , matter i n the mi nd, the
perverted thi ng.
Moneythe
pure exchange i tem, theopi ate of thepeopl e, the
l i mi tl ess f antasy, the Messi ah bef ore the end of ti me.
10. 5

Materi al i smthe l ogi cal anti dote. But i n what we cal l materi al i sm, i t
was not matter that mattered i t was the mi nd that mattered and was made
matter. Materi al i smyokedtosci ence l acked i ts owncontradi cti on andl ost i ts
obj ecti on i n obj ecti vi ty, i ts di al ecti c wi th hi story became ( agai n) the
resentment of hi story.
10. 6 The Ref ormati on as transf ormati on.
Luther, the f ather of Marx
( Rotstei n)
and Protestanti smthe
mother
of capi tal i sm
. Unl i mi ted progress
became possi bl e i n the
templ e of
rati onal i ty
and
posi ti ve sci ence f or whi ch
Comte peddl ed hi s handbi l l s. Soci al i smwas the f ai th of engi neers f romthe
begi nni ng ( St . Si mon) ;
onl ymachi nes can bri ng
l i berty
by
breaki ng the l i mi ts
and bonds of the body. Onl y machi nes can symbol i ze f ul l equal i ty of
exchangeabl e parts ( i n the absence of cl oni ng) and f raterni ty onl yworks
smoothl yi n the sameness the machi ne guarantees. The companyone keeps
becomes thecompanybywhi chonei s kept . Pl annedperf ecti on i s
prof i ci ent, i s
prof i t .
11 . 1

Structure,
born
i n
the
perf ecti on
of the mi nd compel s the past perf ect
and f uture perf ect f uncti on. Perf ecti on, the perf ect def ence agai nst the
l i mi tl essness of the mi nd andthe l i mi ts of the body. Structure, the perf ecti on
of the thi ngwhi chhasvoi ded i tsel f
of i tsel f andti me. Perf ecti on, thepossi bi l i ty
of standi ng sti l l i n rapi d progress, of escapi ng the resentment of hi story, of
what has not been and what maynot be.
11 . 2

Structure, the f ul crumof Athens af ter Socrates' death. Inthedi al ogues
al ready
a sense of knowbetterness yet sti l l bal anced by a chal l enge to
presumed knowl edge,
by negati vi ty - I knowthat I donot know. The
Socrati c method nowal i ve i n School s of
Lawwi th the same resul t - the
puri f i cati on of structure and rul e, the emergence of l awas
a
thi ng i n
i tsel f .
11
. 3

It
i s wel l that Socrates di d not wri te. Wri ti ngbef ore hi m, orphi c and
awesome, f ragmentarynot
onl ythroughthe f orgetf ul ness of hi storybut i n i ts
openness. The Gods were sti l l al i ve and the
word amemorytrace andnot a
bui l di ng bl ock of a mi nd system. The questi on born on the
boundaryof
17
JOHANNW. MOHR
exper i ence t owar ds what has not been, not yet a pr el ude t o an answer whi ch
hi des what el udes us, what t est s and over t axes our r esponse- abi l i t y .
11 . 4

Socr at es,
t he gr eat t eacher wi t h not hi ng t o t each but t o unt each, a
menace t o educat i on andt he st at e
.
ARepubl i c can not sur vi ve t he
aci d
t est of
t he Di al ogue. The
phi l osopher ki ng woul d have t o knownot hi ng.
The
st at e,
whi ch i s a st at e
of mi nd made posi t i ve coul d not sur vi ve i t s own per ver si on
(Umkehr ) made obvi ous. Ci vi l i sat i on woul ddr own i n i t s di s- cont ent whi chi s
t he uneasi ness i n cul t ur e.
11 . 5

The mi nd i s a t abul a r asa(memor y i s not ) i nscr i bed wi t hdi s- cont ent ,
t he r esent ment
of hi st or y whi ch has not been. Teachi ng t r ansf or ms di s-
cont ent i nt o cont ent
and cont ent ment . Teachi ng makes sense apar t f r omt he
senses; wher e i d has not been ego shal l be. Teachi ng pr ovi des t he t oken,
t he
si gn and consi der at i on f or t he under t aki ng whi ch l ays t he quest i on t o r est .
Expl anat i on emanat es f r omt he pl ane, t he pl an, t he nor mandt he common,
t he (cl osed) syst em. The body r ef uses t o st op achi ng af t er al l expl anat i on.
11 . 6

Beyond al l st r uct ur i ng and st r uct ur e t he body r et ai ns i t s memor y of
pl easur e andpai n i n t he exper i ence of what has andhas not been, f used i n t he
dr eam, t he ki ndl ed
and ki ndr ed spi r i t . The dr eam, pr egnant f l ui di t y whi ch
hi des i t s body or i gi n f r omt he mi nd but opens i t sel f t o t he quest i on
of
bei ng;
t he dr eam, spi r i t t o t he body, ghost t o t he mi nd.
12. 1

; Wher e i s t he spi r i t i n t he Phenomenol ogy of t he Mi nd?Thecogni t i ve
st r uct ur e whi chsuper sedes t he t aken f or gr ant ed deus est andt he empt y body
i n space
i s
augment ed
by t he di al ect i c
f unct i on
of becomi ng andest r angement ,
of t he spi r i t whi chf ul f i l l s i t sel f i n t he cour se of t i me, i n hi st or y . (TheGer man
"Gei st " cover s up t he di sj unct i on and Engl i sh t r ansl at or s ar e f or ever i n
t r oubl e bet ween spi r i t and mi nd) .
12. 2

The spi r i t ' s r ef l ect i on i n t he mi nd (Schei n), t he cave of t he ego, t he
ghost i n t he machi ne; but Hegel ' s wor ds cur i ousl y al i ve andcl ose t ot he body.
What i s pr omi sed i s a Syst emof Sci ence i n Consci ousness and Sel f - con-
sci ousness i n Reason and Spi r i t , Rel i gi on and Absol ut e Knowl edge. The
syst emr emai ns i ncompl et e i n ever y r espect , t he body' s l anguage coul d not be
suf f i ci ent l y st er i l i zed f or a per f ect mi nd f unct i on. The ger mi nal mat t er
(humus) r emai ns but t he dr eami s hi dden.
1 8
THECLOUDOFKNOWING
12. 3

Descar t es was
no st r anger t o t he dr eamand t he l i vi ng body but hi s
mot her di ed ear l y and t he l oss of t he
br east
was
never f or got t en. The
subsequent at t empt byt he men of t he
Company,
t he
School men, t oheal t he
l oss bya br i col age of t he mi ndwas never f or got t en; t he
di sappoi nt ment of t he
body andt he uncer t ai nt y i n t he mi nd wer e deep andt he answer f or mi dabl e
:
12. 4

. . . but t hat t he humanbodyi nasmuch as i t di f f er s f r omot her bodi es i s
composed onl y of a cer t ai n conf i gur at i on of member s and of ot her si mi l ar
acci dent s, whi l e t he human mi nd i s not si mi l ar l ycomposedof any
acci dent s,
but i s a pur e subst ance. ( Medi t at i ons, Synopsi s)
12. 5

And t he answer
ar ose
i n
a dr eamandcame f r omt he Vi r gi n Mar y, t he
pr e- oedi pal mot her , af t er t he body' s act i oni nf enci ng
and
t he
body' s
r epose i n
musi c
and t he sol d body as sol di er and t he est r angement of t r avel andwar
coul dnot put Humpt yDumpt y
t oget her agai n. Int he bi r t h of t he egot he body
becomes une chose qui pense, r es cogi t ans . But onl y i n t he mi nd, ( t he
body' s
per ver si on) :
12. 6

. . . For , as r egar ds t o t he conduct of our l i f e, wear e f r equent l y obl i ged
t o f ol l owopi ni ons
whi ch ar e mer el y pr obabl e, because t he oppor t uni t i es of
act i on woul d i n most cases pass
awaybef or e we coul ddel i ver our sel ves f r om
our doubt s . ( Pr i nci pl es, III)
12. 7

The Bodyand t he Dr eamr emai n pr i vat e domai ns : Si r , I
r ubbed my
eyes t o see whet her or not I was sl eepi ng whenI r ead i n your
l et t er t hat you
wer e
pl anni ng t o come her e; and even nowI dar e not r ej oi ce at t hi s news
ot her wi se t hen as i f i t wer e onl y a dr eam. - Mor eover , I must t el l you t hat I
awai t you her e wi t h a l i t t l e bundl e of dr eams whi ch wi l l per haps not
be
di spl easi ng t o
you - .
Andt he sat i sf i ed senses ar e i n nosense i n
doubt :
Ever y
day
I
t ake a st r ol l ami d
t he conf usi on of a gr eat cr owd- . Event he noi se of t hei r comi ngs
and
goi ngs
does not i nt er r upt mydaydr eams any mor e t hanwoul dt he soundof a br ook.
If at t i mes I
r ef l ect ont hei r act s, I r ecei ve t he same pl easur e t hat you woul d
have i n
wat chi ng peasant s cul t i vat e your f i el ds : f or I see t hat al l t hei r l abour
ser ves
t o ador n t he pl ace of my abode and t o pr event me f r oml acki ng
anyt hi ng I
need. ( Let t er t o M. deBal zac, May 15 , 163 1)
12. 8

The
chose qui pense must l i ve wel l . Whent he wi l y Gal i l eo
( who al so
l i ked t o l i ve
wel l ) was appr ehended f or hi s her esy concer ni ng
t he ear t h' s
mot i on, Descar t es pr ot ect ed hi s
body secur el y: - and al t hough I t hought ,
t hey wer e basedonver ysur e andobvi ous pr oof s, I
woul d not f or anyt hi ng i n
1 9
JOHANNW. MOHR
t he wor l d uphol d t hemagai nst t he aut hor i t y of t he Chur ch. -I amnot so
f ond of my t hought s t o wi sh
t o
make use of [ such] except i ons i n or der t o be
abl e
t o mai nt ai n
t hem; and
t he desi r e I have t ol i ve i n peace andt ocont i nue t he
l i f e whi ch I have begun by t aki ng f or my mot t o: bene vi xi t , bene qui
l at ui t ( he
l i ves wel l who l i ves a r et i r ed l i f e) -. ( Let t er t o Fat her Mer senne,
Januar y
20,
1634) I have my pr i nci pl es, i f you don' t l i ke t hem
I
have ot her s . Even
t he gent l e
Ei nst ei n ur ged t he at ombomb
.
12
. 9

The ego
saf e
i n t he mi nd, god neut r al i zed i n per f ect i on, t he body
di smember ed i n st r anger ness : What ot her spot i n t he wor l d coul done choose,
i n whi ch al l t he conveni ences and cur i osi t i es of l i f e one coul d desi r e ar e as easy
t o f i nd
as
her e?
What
ot her
count r y
i n whi ch one may enj oy such compl et e
f r eedom, or sl eep wi t h l ess uneasi ness; wher e t her e ar e al ways f oot -sol di er s
avai l abl e f or t he expr ess pur pose of pr ot ect i ng us; -( Let t er t o M. deBal zac)
The per f ect model f or moder ni t y.
13. 1 One hundr ed year s af t er f ai t h was l i ber at ed f r oml abour ( and
l abour er s wer e r ebound) , t hought was separ at ed f r omt he body ( whi ch coul d
nowbe sol d f or pi ece wor kand t i me) . Capi t al ( r el at i ng t o t he head, deadl y,
mor t al ) i s f i nal l y unencumber ed and can gener at e i t sel f t hr ough mi ndi ng,
i nst i t ut i on and st r uct ur e.
13 . 2

Body and l abour , means and pr oduct i on, t he i mper f ect machi ne,
i mper f ect out put . I t i s i nsuf f i ci ent t o spl i t f ai t h f r oml abour , t o spl i t body and
mi nd; t he body st i l l has t o be gener at ed t o pr ovi de a sub-st r uct ur e and
l abour
has gener at ed cust oms, a super -st r uct ur e whi ch st ands i n t he way
of capi t al
and i t s
per f ect i on .
13 . 3

The body needs t o be
bor ne and pr oduced i n l abour , and sust ai ned by
par ent s ( par er e-pr oduce) and ki nf ol k. The body bor n i s not anybody
nowher e, but somebody somewher e, par t i cul ar and not par t i cl e, and ever
mor e par t i cul ar as i t gr ows i n t he f ami l i ar wi t h
par t i cul ar ot her s . Par ent s had
t o be t r ansf or med i nt o t he
par ens pat r i ae and f ami l y i nt o t he commonweal t h
of nat i ons .
13. 4 Oi kos ( Eco-) , t he house,
househol d and t empl e, r el at i ons and
bel ongi ng. Oi konomi a, t he way t he househol d i s managed, t he nat ur e of car e.
20
THECLOUDOFKNOWING
Economyandecol ogyspeak of bel ongi ngt oget her . Et hos, t he waywe behave
t o each ot her , body as char act er , house as home; et hi cs i s humanet hol ogy.
13. 5

Fami l y i s what i s f ami l i ar , ki nshi p and house, ser vant , sl ave and
pr oper t y,
but f i r st and f or emost bel ongi ngt oget her i nwhat ever sense we may
see
i t .
As behavi our i s what we have been, bel ongi ng i s what we have l onged
f or , bi ndi ng
and bond of t he body, memor y and member shi p.
13. 6
Member shi p
i s al ways i ncompl et e. Memor y r emember s what i s
cont i nuousl y
di smember ed i n consumpt i on and r et ent i on. Bel ongi ng
sedi ment s
i nt obel ongi ngs, pr oper t y. Andpr oper i s what bel ongs t oonesel f , or
i t sel f ;
and pr oper t y, t he sel f possessed, sedi ment s i nt opossessi ont ost ave of f
t he r evul si on
of t i me and i t s ` i t has been' .
13. 7

Egoi s pr oper t y,
and i dent i t y t he sel f possessed. The bodychanges and
separ at es i n Er os and Thanat os . Pushedout
f r om
t he
comf or t of t he womb,
t aken of f t he nour i shi ng br east , l osi ng t he hi di ng pl ace of home
and f i nal l y
whent he over whel mi ng wor l di s somewhat known, l osi ng i t t oo. For
men, t he
r epet i t i on compul si on of r egai ni ng what has been l ost ; f or
women, t he
compul si onof t he r epet i t i onof l osi ng what has beengai nedandf or man
bot h
t oget her . The pi et a, t he symbol of uni t y.
V. MR. WOLF, WHATTIMEIS IT?
I t el l
you t hi s ; unl ess you t ur n r ound and become l i ke
chi l dr en, you wi l l
never ent er t he ki ngdomof Heaven.
(Mat hew
18, 2)
14. 1

At t he end of Descar t es' t i me was Fr eud. At t he endof Descar t es' l i f e,
bef or e he di ed f r omt he demands of t he chi l d mot her , t he mast er st udent , a
f i nal
at t empt t o deal wi t h t he passi ons, separ at e f r omt he bodyandyet i n t he
body: -t he ul t i mat e
and most pr oxi mat e cause of t he passi ons of t he soul i s
none ot her t han t he
agi t at i on wi t h whi ch t he spi r i t s move t he l i t t l e gl and,
whi ch i s i n t he mi ddl e of t he br ai n. (Passi ons
of t he Soul Ll )
14. 2

The
gr eat doubt er , whosol d subsequent cent ur i es ont he
cer t ai nt y of
t hought as cogi t at i on
and st r uct ur e, f al l s back i nt o t he t waddl e of r ecei ved
l ear ni ng as i f he never
had di scour sed on met hod, and mi sses what ever
21
JOHA
NNW. MOHR
meani ngt here was: -I
donot seewhyt heyhave desi red
t oref er t hem[ t he
passi ons] al l t o
concupi scence or anger . (Passi ons of
t heSoul LXVI I I )
14. 3

Thegl andi n
t hemi ddl e of t hebrai n, t hebrai ni n
t hemi ddl e of t he
worl d, t heworl d
as mi nd, as egoandi dent i t y, as
obj ect i f i cat i onandobj ect .
Thedi smembered
bodyyet l i nkedt ot hebrai nbynerves
and: -what i s here
most wort hy
of remark i s t hat al l t hemost ani mat ed
andsubt l eport i onsof t he
bl ood whi ch t he heat has rari f i ed
i n t he heart , ent er ceasel essl y i n l arge
quant i t i es
i nt o t hecavi t y of t hebrai n.
(Passi ons of t heSoul X)
14. 4
Descart es' desperat e endi ng
was i n Freud' s i nnocent begi nni ng.
Devot i ont ophi l osophyt urned
i nt omedi ci nebyapparent exi genci es, i nt ot he
st udy
of t he brai n and sci ence, di ssect i on
and anal ysi s. (And whyt he
chemi st ry of gases? Was i t an echo of : -
nerves whi ch resembl e smal l
f i l ament s, or l i t t l e
t ubes, whi chal l proceedf romt he brai n, and
t hus cont ai n
l i ke i t acert ai n very
subt l e ai r or wi ndwhi ch i s cal l ed t he
ani mal spi ri t s.
(Passi ons of t he
Soul , VI I ) )
14. 5

Hyst eri aspeaks of pl aceandt i meaf t er t he
womb. Hyst eri acomest oo
l at e and must
search f or i t s begi nni ng. Hyst eri a, emot i on
i n t he mi nd
searchi ngf or
abody, anybodyi nanyf ormbut al waysf i ndi ngt he
mi ndandi t s
cont rol . La grande
hyst eri e est l e grandhypnot i sm, power
as knowl edge,
necessi t yas desi re. The
body' s rej ect ed knowl edgeas bodyof
knowl edge, as
proof of t hemi ndi n
t he body' s paral ysi s.
14. 6

How
manyci rcumvent eddesi res i n t hesci ence
of t hemi nd? Theaut hor
whobecomes t he
aut hori t yandt heaut hori t ari anst ruct uri ng
t heorgani c t o
i ncrease regul ari t y
and cont rol . The pat i ent seeki ng (and recei vi ng)
t he
domi nance of t he
doct or af t er t he sel l out of t he sel f . Thesel f -wi l l ed
and
spont aneous, t he act
wi t hout apparent cause (aut omat os) becomes
t he
aut omat on, t hemechani smof
def ense.
14. 7 Hyst eri a di sappears f romt he
Sal pet ri ere af t er Charcotr Bl anche
Wi t t man(hi s st ar pat i ent ) as Bl ancheI ret urns
t oradi ol ogyas Bl ancheI I and
di es (as she
hasl i ved) amart yr t osci ence. Thepri maryaut hori t i es
aremenand
t he pri mary pat i ent s
are women i n t he Di scovery of t he Unconsci ous
(El l enberger), t here-di scoveryof t he
body.
14. 8

Af t er Charcot ' s deat h, t he st udent s
repudi at e t he mast er and hi de
behi ndt he
rest ruct uredbody, t he organas st ruct ureandf unct i on;
t heorgan
as i nst rument
or t ool (organon) whi ch works (ergon) but
i s af f l i ct edwi t h
orgasmandanger
. The mi ndi nst ruct s t he body beyondi t s organi c
l i mi t s.
22
THECLOUDOF
KNOWING
Bet ween Char cot ' s domi nanceandt he
pat i ent ' s submi ssi on, l a gr ande hyst er i e
was l e gr andor gasme, desi r e f r ozen
i n a cl i ni cal l y st er i l i zed pose ( seepai nt i ng
by A. Br oui l l et ) yi el di ng power
t o bot h. The power di sappear ed wi t h
t hei r
bodi es but t he myst er y
r emai ned.
14. 9

What was l ef t unsai d
i n t he case of Char cot , Fr eud began t o see i n
hi s
movement f r omst r uct ur ed
obser vat i on t o t he dr eam, f r omanal ysi s t o sel f
anal ysi s, f r omAnna O. t o
Moses and Monot hesi m. The pr omi sed l and and
caval r y, l i bi do and
Thanat os . Moses, t hel awgi ver , was not al l owed
t o seet he
pr omi sed l and andt he
i ndecent shar i ng of Chr i st ' s body was cover ed by
Paul
i n a
newst r uct ur e, t he Chur ch.
14. 10
Br euer , t he f at her , r ef used t o ent er t he pr omi sed
l and of t he body.
Fl i ess, t he br ot her ( i nspi t e of noseoper at i onand
congr esses) escaped i nt o t he
met asci ence
of number s, t he def ense of per f ect i on. We can
under st and t he
f r i ght : a br ot her ani mal was vanqui shed
( Roazen: Tausk) . J ung, t he son ( t he
Chr i st i an who knew of
t he sacr i f i ce of sons) escaped i nt o cul t ur e and
met acul t ur e, t he t r oubl ed mi nd.
14. 11

The covenant wi t h t he body
i s bi ndi ngas possi bi l i t y andas cast r at i on.
Body i s bondage, i s mast er and
sl ave i ncont i nuous r evol ut i onagai nst hi st or y,
dependence andl i mi t s . Ana- l ysi s as
r esol ut i on andr el ease, not f r ombondage
( t hi s i s i mpossi bl e) but f r omt he r esent ment of
hi st or y whi ch has not been, t o
makea newl or dshi p possi bl e, a
newdoxaamongt he par a- doxa, knowl edge
among t he
par a- noi a. Concupi scence andanger as season andt i me. Car e
and
sor r owar e
t he same ( Sor ge) .
14. 12 To be Oedi pus Rex ( or not
t o
be
Oedi pus Rex) i s t he uneasi ness i n
cul t ur e. To r epr ess t he wager i s
ci vi l i sat i on
and
i t s di scont ent . Oedi pus, t o
r epeat agai n t he most
const ant r epet i t i on, sl ewhi s f at her andknewhi s mot her
and bl i nded hi s gaze
( t heor y) bef or e goi ng i nt o Col onos .
Chr i st , RexJ udor um( f or ever y At hens t her e i s a J er usal em) accept ed
cast r at i on f or t he sake of t heki ngdomof Heaven( t heet er nal mot her ) andwas
sl ai n by hi s f at her .
JOHANNW. MOHR
15. 1
There are two stori es : So
God created man i n hi s own i mage,
i n the
i mage of Godcreated he hi m;
mal e and f emal e created he them.
( Genesi s
1, 27) . Thi s story i s cl ear and
succi nct, but wesoonl earnedthat i t
was
not that si mpl e
. Af ter the begi nni ng of ti me
andthe nami ng of al l l i vi ng
creatures
( the f i rst bui l di ng bl ocks of the
mi nd) the process had
to be
descri bed
: Andthe LordGodcaused
a deep sl eep to f al l uponAdam,
andhe
sl ept ;
andhe took one of hi s ri bs, and
cl osedup the f l esh i nsteadthereof . And
the ri b whi ch the
Lord Godhad taken f romman, made he
a womanand
brought
her unto the man. ( Genesi s
2, 21- 22) They were both nakedbut
were
not yet
ashamed. Thi s came l ater wi th knowi ng
. Cl ari ty i s l ost i n ti me and
knowl edge
.
15 . 2

The
memory i s ol d but sti l l troubl es us
as busy as wehave beentotrace
evol uti on, to
grasp the autonomous cel l whi ch
di vi des i tsel f andto put every
l i vi ng si gn i nto
ti me and order . Ari ch f i el d
of uncountabl e years and
uncountabl e
creatures to make what poi nt?
( Whereal most any poi nt coul dbe
made i n the
mi nd) . Af ter one voyage, Darwi n
spent the rest of hi s l i f e i n
secl usi onto put
the mi ndi ncontrol of the f ri ght of
creatureness, i ts dyi ngand
becomi ng whi ch
we share.
15. 3

Many
mi nds were cal l ed onbut he persi sted
i n gi vi ng reasons f or the
state of nature, as hi s
countrymanbef ore hi mgave reasons f or
the nature of
the state by f ri ghteni ng
us wi th the war of al l agai nst al l , wi th
a l i f e that was
nasty, bruti sh andshort
. Andl i f e vi ewedthrougha system,
a
state
( of ) nature,
mi nd or other l egal
structure andLevi athan i s nasty, bruti sh
andshort .
15. 4

Generati ons come
andgenerati ons goandnot eventhef i ttest
survi ve
f or ever . The poi nt i s
to make an
Arti f i ci al
Ani mal , anArti f i ci al Man: -
For
what i s the Heart but a spri ng; andthe
Nerves, but so many stri ngs ; andthe
Joynts,
but so many wheel es, gi vi ng moti on
to
the
whol e Body, such as was
i ntendedby the
Arti f i cer? Art goes yet f urther, i mi tati ng
that Rati onal l and
most excel l ent
Worke of Nature, Man. For by Art
i s created that great
Levi athancal l ed
a Common- Weal th or State, ( i nl ati ne Ci vi tas) whi ch
i s but
an Ari ti f i cal l Man; and
i n whi ch, the Soverai gnty i s anArti f i ci al l
Soul , as
gi vi ng
l i f e andMoti on to the whol e
body
;
- ( Levi athan, I ntroducti on) .
15. 5

The Great Arti f i cer was
f ortui tous : -
I
cannot l ook at the uni verse as
the
resul t of bl i ndchance, yet I can
seenoevi dence of benef i ci ent desi gnof any
ki ndi nthe
detai l s . - ( Darwi n, 1870) Onl y themi nd
andthe state canbestow
benef i ci al desi gns
( of benef i t towhomremai ns the questi on)
. Meanwhi l ethe
si ckl y Darwi nwas cared
f or by hi s wi f e.
24
THECLOUDOF
KNOWING
15. 6

The body' s answer t o l i mi t and i nf i ni t y i s
af f ect and af f i ni t y. Where
Darwi n sawt i meand i t s ravi shes and
anarchi sm, Kropot ki n sawmut ual ai d
amongl i vi ngcreat ures and t urned t o
anarchi smt o l et bei ngbe. Thepri nce as
pauper i n a bourgeoi s worl d.
15. 7

Order has t o beordered; Teemi ng
humani t y cont rol l ed. Thearche( t he
begi nni ng) has t o be augment ed by and
f i nal l y convert ed i nt o t echne( art , craf t
and cunni ng) t o ward of f t he
t hreat of f ai l i ngparadi gms . The body cannot
pass onacqui red l earni ng. Whenceshoul d perf ect i on come
f rom? Vi t abrevi s,
ars l onga. Consci ous of t i me, art has t o be art f ul ,
craf t craf t y t o make
benef i ci al desi gns f or t he ego.
16 . 1

Thegodwho
cannot beperf ect i nt heworl d, t he
deus abscondi t us, t he
god i n hi di ng,
becomes t he di sappoi nt i ng god
who has l ef t and i s f i nal l y
renounced.
Coperni cus envi si oned a new
cel est i al order but Kepl er al ready
deepl y
di sappoi nt ed i n hi s st ruggl e t o prove
t hat t hi s order was perf ect ; t he
perf ect ci rcl e becamet he i mperf ect i on
of t heel i pses whent hej umbl ed
dat aof
Tycho Brahe f el l i nt o pl ace. How
can we l i ve wi t h an
i mperf ect god?
Perf ect i on i s t he f ul l f i l l ment
of t he mi nd, t he
empt i ness of t he body.
It Is
Ful f i l l ed, i s t he end of t he
body, t he rest i s corpus
myst i cum.
16 . 2

The great
i mperf ect i on of t he body i s t he
si ngul ari t y of sex and t he
need
f or compl et i on i n t he ot her . ( Or at l east
t hus t he way back t o t he body
begi ns) . Theneed f or t he ot her remai ns
t henarci ssi st i c i nj ury of t he ego,
even
i f t he ot her i s sought i n what
onehas been or i n what one
has not been i nt he
af f i rmat i on of t he same sex.
16 . 3

It
i s
not a mat t er of count i ng. Sons ki l l
t hei r mot hers moreof t en t han
t hei r f at hers and f at hers sl eep wi t ht hei r
daught ers moreof t en t hansons wi t h
t hei r mot hers . Thei nf ant , unabl et o
speak, i s pol ymorphous perverse l i ke
t he
word whi ch was i n t he
begi nni ng. Our sense of perf ect i on and
order i s
t hreat ened by t hose
who cannot rel i nqui shomni pot ence, t he mi nd' s
def ense
agai nst t he f ragi l i t y of t he body and
i nf ant i ci de. The manchi l d' s l ong
dependency i s f earsomeandf ul l of para- noi a, t o
whi cht hemanmust ret urn at
every t hreat .
16
. 4

Looki ng and showi ngi s t he af f i rmat i on of
i dent i t y ( sameness) and
di f f erence ( beari ng apart ) .
The di s- membered body i s t he part i al i zed
sex
obj ect ,
t he l ove subj ect
di spl aced and t hus mi spl aced and
not t o
be
f ound
by
2 5
JOHA
NN
W. MOHR
r epet i t i on compul si on.
What has been i ncompl et e
cannot be compl et ed
( per f ect ed) by
gr at i f i cat i on, onl y by despai r . We must not
i magi ne Si syphus t o
be happy.
16. 5

Domi nance and submi ssi on
ar e t he ego' s r esponse t o t he
t hr eat of
separ at i on and l oss. Gi vi ng
pai n and r ecei vi ng pai n bef or e t hei r
t i me has
come, i s wi l f ul l cont r ol of despai r ,
t he evi l of war di ng of f evi l . Bankvaul t s and
pr i son cel l s cont ai n t he wages
of si n, t he r eal conf i ned as a
def ense agai nst
del i ver ance .
What i s sensel ess i s sense- l ess but not
mi ndl ess.
16. 6

Desi r e i s t he exper i ence of
i mper f ect i on, t he onl y openness we
possess
and whi ch possesses us. Desi r e
sor t s t he wor l d ( and us) i n i t s own
way.
Exper i ence i s t he embodi ment of
desi r e i n what has been and what
has not
been. The embodi ment of t he
exper i ence of . what has not been
i s ar t .
16. 7

Ar t i s i n- f or mat i on of t he
body,
i t s
char i sma( f r ee gi f t ) and car e. The
mi nd i n- st r uct s. Ar t i n- f or ms
. St r uct ur e i s di mi ni shed f or mas f or mul a
; t he
mi nd' s ar t i s t he ar t i f act . For m
i s physi s as met a- physi s . The l i mi t s
of
exper i ence
can be de- f i ned ( and conf i ned) i n t he
obj ect i ve st r uct ur e of t he
mi nd or
be subj ect ed t o t he subl i mi t as, t he subl i me; t he choi ce
i s ego bui l di ng
( t he def ense of pr i de)
or subl i mat i on .
16. 8

Fr om
gener at i on t o gener at i on t he t hr eshhol d ( t he l i mi t ) r enews
i t sel f
i nt o newf or ms f r om
exper i ences shar ed sub- l i mes . The bi r t hof t he
body. The
i mage of ar t
i s i t sel f at hr eshhol d; i nexchangeabl e,
non- r edepl oyabl e, non-
r ef undabl e bot t l es of
spi r i t , j eni i . Can we r egai n const i t ut i on f r om
i nst i t ut i on,
bei ng f r omego, ar t f r omt he
ar t i f i ci al , spi r i t and body ( whi ch ar e one) f r om
pur pose
and t i me? Can we r egai n t hi nki ng
( whi ch i s t hanki ng) f r om
cogi t at i on? I t
i s t i me t o r et ur n f r omout er space, i t
i s t i me t o gat her .
Bef or e Moses, Pl at o and Paul , we ar e.
Bef or e Descar t es, Fr eud was.
The
acci dent i s t i me.
Osgoode Hal l Law School
Yor k Uni ver si t y
Canadi an J ournal of Pol i t i cal andSoci al
Theory/ Revue canadi enne. d
e
t heori epol i t i queet soci al e, Vol . 2, No. 3 ( Fal l /
Aut omne, 1978) .
NEEDS, EXCHANGES ANDTHE
FETI SHI SM
OF OBJ ECTS*
Wi l l i am
Lei ss
I : I nt roduct i on
Theant hropol ogi st RaymondFi rt h has wri t t en: " I was onceasked
by t he
l at e Robert Redf i el d t o address hi s semi nar wi t h ref erence t o
t he quest i on,
`What canonesay of aman-anyman?' Myt hemei n repl y was t hat
at some
poi nt s of hi s soci al exi st ence every manwi l l engage i n act s of exchange
. " ' I n
t hi s remark t hereseems t o echot heopeni ng passages of AdamSmi t h' s Weal t h
of Nat i ons, wherei t i s sai dt hat t he " propensi t y t o t ruck, bart er and
exchange
onet hi ng f or anot her . . . i s commont o al l men. " Thosewhoare
l ooki ng f or an
account of t he humanessence, andwhohaveconsi dered
t he opt i ons rangi ng
f romhomo f aber t o homo l udens, may have
overl ooked an obvi ous
candi dat e: homomercat or, man t he t rader.
I n f act Fi rt h' s poi nt i s
not t he sameas Smi t h' s . Fromt he l at t er st emmeda
t radi t i on i n modernpol i t i cal economy whi chj udged t he mat eri al out put of
" savage" soci et i es accordi ng t o ani nvi di ous cri t eri on of economi c
rat i onal i t y
andf oundt hemwant i ng. Fi rt h' s work, ont he ot her hand, i s
one
of
t he most
i mport ant cont ri but i ons t o t he t went i et h-cent ury economi c
ant hropol ogy
whi chhas al t eredf undament al l your underst andi ng
of earl i er humancul t ures .
Thi s research exposed t he f al l acy of
at t empt i ng t o f i t al l humanhi st ory i nt o
t he concept ual mol dof amarket soci et y. ( Of courseMarxi smt ri edt o dot hi s
as wel l , but l ess successf ul l y, f or i t shared wi t h i t s bourgeoi s opponent s t he
need t o f i nd a l i near l ogi c i n hi st ory. )
Therest ri ct edscopeof market exchanges i nmanypri mi t i vesoci et i es caused
many earl i er observers t o mi srepresent t hei r
soci o-economi c arrangement s .
*f or
Herbert Marcuse, on
t he occasi on of hi s ei ght i et h
bi rt hday.
2 7
WI LLI AMLEI SS
Themost notor i ous exampl e
i s
per haps the
theor y
of pr i mi ti ve
communi sm.
Pr i vate pr oper ty,
di vi si on of l abour , the str i vi ng f or i ndi vi dual r ewar d,
mar gi nal uti l i ty cal cul ati ons, and extensi ve exchanges bothwi thi n and among
tr i bal uni ts f l our i shed, but they wer e conceal ed to some extent by the
customar y pr i nci pl es of r eci pr oci ty and r edi str i buti on whi chcontr ol l ed thei r
natur eand scope. Thef act that they occur r ed l ar gel y ( but not enti r el y) i n non-
mar ket contexts di sgui sed howmuchthey shar ed - i n ter ms of thei r soci al
f uncti ons - wi thsi mi l ar acti vi ti es i n mar ket contexts . For i n many pr i mi ti ve
soci eti es, "the channel s of soci al obl i gati ons f uncti on as a substi tute f or a
mar ket . "z
I n thi s paper I have f ol l owed the i nter pr etati on that l ooks at both the
"mater i al exchangeof man and natur e" ( Mar x) and
the
networ k of exchanges
among per sons
as f uncti ons of mor e gener al cul tur al deter mi nants
. 3 As
Mar shal l Sahl i ns puts i t, i n pr i mi ti veexchange"themater i al
f l owunder wr i tes
or i ni ti ates soci al r el ati ons. " 4 Thi s per specti ve
suggests ther e ar e cer tai n
under l yi ng conti nui ti es spanni ng what seems to be the unbr i dgeabl e gul f
between pr i mi ti ve and i ndustr i al mar ket soci eti es; not that thedi sconti nui ti es
ar e l ess r eal or uni mpor tant . Si mpl i sti cal l y, exchanger el ati onshi ps consti tute
the chi ef el ement of conti nui ty,
and the mar ket ver sus non- mar ket context
of
exchanges mar ks the
chi ef el ement of di sconti nui ty .
Thi s paper ' s pur pose i s to expl or e newr outes towar d a cr i ti cal theor y of
needs f or contempor ar y soci ety. s I t was pr ompted pr i mar i l y by myconvi cti on
that nei ther of the two mai n appr oaches i n the r ecei ved r adi cal cr i ti que of
capi tal i sm- the theor y of r ei f i cati on and commodi ty f eti shi smand the
di sti ncti on between
tr ue and
f al se
needs - pr ovi des an adequate basi s
f or
a
cr i ti cal eval uati on of soci al change possi bi l i ti es i n today' s soci ety. A
pr evi ous paper ar gued that an exami nati on of the symbol i c pr oper ti es of
goods i s a key el ement i n atheor y of commodi ty f eti shi sm, and i t under tooka
tr i al exami nati on of themby anal yz i ng adver ti sements wi th the ai d of
concepts used i n communi cati ons theor y. Thi s paper tr i es to str engthen that
case.
I ts basi c pr esupposi ti on i s that somel i ght canbeshed on pr obl ems
i n
the
theor y of needs by seeki ng to uncover str uctur ed f eatur es i n the "systemof
obj ects"
( Baudr i l l ar d' s
phr ase) whi chi s thepr i nci pal sour ceof thesati sf acti on
of needs i n a mar ket soci ety.
The paper takes a
r oundabout path. I ts star ti ng- poi nt i s the per specti ve on
contempor ar y soci ety devel oped by Ti bor Sci tovsky ( TheJ oyl ess Economy)
and Fr ed Hi r sch( Soci al Li mi ts to Gr owth) , whi ch
was
di scussed br i ef l y i n
the
pr evi ous paper . These studi es f ocus on thr ee
si gni f i cant
f eatur es
i n the
consumpti on or consumer behavi our si de of our pr esent- day economy: ( 1) the
i mpor tance of i nter per sonal compar i sons or soci al r anki ng; ( 2) the
r el ati onshi p between thi s emul ati ve behavi our and goods consumpti on; ( 3 )
the symbol i c deter mi nati ons of r ank and pr esti ge i n economi c acti vi ty
.
2 8
THE
FETI SHI SM
OF
OBJ ECTS
Al l t hr ee f eat ur es wer e al so pr omi nent i n many
( but not al l ) pr i mi t i ve
soci et i es . The mor e l i mi t ed physi cal di mensi ons of t hose
soci et i es, and t he
mor e l i mi t ed r ange of goods wi t h
whi ch t heyoper at ed cast s t hose f eat ur es i nt o
shar p
r el i ef .
I suggest t hat
expl or i ng t he expr essi on of t hose " pr i mi t i ve"
behavi our
pat t er ns
can ai d our under st andi ng of howt he di al ect i c of needs
and obj ect s
i s
expr essed i n our i ndust r i al mar ket soci et y.
The gener al i zed mar ket
exchanges i nt r oduced by capi t al i st soci et y br eak
down t he bar r i er s t o
exchange and by means of a uni ver sal cur r encygi ve a
common denomi nat or t o al l obj ect s . Thus i t woul d seemat f i r st gl ance t hat
t her e i s l i t t l e poi nt i n r evi ewi ng t he ver y di f f er ent st r uct ur ed exchanges of
pr i mi t i ve soci et i es, i f one' s obj ect i ve i s t o bet t er under st and t he i nt er pl ayof
needs and obj ect s i n our own i ndust r i al mar ket soci et y. Some r easons f or
under t aki ng t hi s ki nd of compar at i ve exer ci se ar e of f er ed i n Mar shal l Sahl i ns'
Cul t ur e and Pr act i cal Reason. Sahl i ns' pr i mar yobj ect i ve i s t o ar gue t hat t her e
i s a commont hr ead uni t i ng al l t ypes of humansoci et i es, f r omt he pr i mi t i ve t o
t he
moder n-t he act i on
of cul t ur e i n shapi ngt he mat er i al exchanges bet ween
humans and t he
nat ur al
envi r onment . I n di f f er ent ways t he symbol i c
st r uct ur es expr essed i n cul t ur al f or ms def i ne t he soci et y' s concept i on of
mat er i al ut i l i t y, t he sel ect i on and t r ansf or mat i on of nat ur al mat er i al s i nt o
desi r ed obj ect s . Thi s i s t he common t hr ead
or cont i nuumi n humancul t ur e,
" . . . i n West er n cul t ur e t he economyi s t he mai n si t e of
symbol i c pr oduct i on.
For us t he pr oduct i on of goods i s at t he same t i me t he pr i vi l eged mode of
symbol i c pr oduct i on and t r ansmi ssi on, . . . by compar i son wi t h a' pr i mi t i ve'
wor l d wher e t he l ocus of symbol i c di f f er ent i at i on r emai ns soci al r el at i ons,
pr i nci pal l y ki nshi p r el at i ons, and ot her spher es of act i vi t y ar e or der ed byt he
oper at i ve di st i nct i ons of ki nshi p. "
6
The key poi nt i n t hi s appr oach
i s
t he
not i on t hat behi nd t he abst r act
equi val ence of obj ect s ( exchange-val ue) expr essed
by
t he
uni ver sal medi umof
exchange ( money) i n moder n soci et y, needs and t he obj ect s of needs ar e
st r uct ur ed
by
symbol i c or cul t ur al det er mi nat i ons . Sahl i ns br i ef l y
di scusses
f ood and cl ot hi ng t o i l l ust r at e t he appl i cat i on of hi s appr oach
t o
cont empor ar yconsumpt i on pat t er ns ; I wi l l r et ur n t o t hi s i n Sect i on I V. The
pr esupposi t i on of my own adapt at i on of i t i s t hat i nvest i gat i ng t hese
st r uct ur ed
det er mi nat i ons of t he obj ect s of needs - i . e . , commodi t i es - i s a
pot ent i al l y f r ui t f ul
met hod f or a cr i t i cal t heor y of needs .
One f i nds i n adver t i si ng t he most obvi ous exampl e
of t he syst emat i c l i nki ng
of symbol s and obj ect s i n our soci et y. The st udyby Kl i ne and
Lei ss
of f er s
some evi dence f or t he vi ewt hat t her e ar e si gni f i cant pat t er ned or st r uct ur ed
el ement s i n
adver t i si ng' s associ at i on bet ween goods and i mager y, r ei nf or ci ng
t he si mi l ar concl usi ons
r eached bysomewhat di f f er ent r out es i nt he r esear ches
of Leymor e
and Wi l l i amson. 7 Al t hough adver t i sement s i n t hemsel ves cannot
be i nt er pr et ed
as i ndi cat or s of t he st r uct ur e of needs, t hey mayyi el d some
29
WI LLI AMLEI SS
cl ues t hat wi l l
enabl e us t o f rame more preci se quest i ons ( i ncl udi ng research
desi gns f or empi ri cal st udi es of at t i t udes and behavi our) about howpersons
devel op t hei r underst andi ng of t hei r needs i n our hi gh- i nt ensi t y market
set t i ng. These i nqui ri es i n t urn mi ght enabl e us t o bet t er
comprehend t he l at ent
soci al change possi bi l i t i es i n capi t al i st soci et i es t oday.
The f ol l owi ng sect i ons t race out t hi s roundabout approach t o a cri t i cal
t heory of needs . Sect i on I I i nvest i gat es t he geneal ogy of Sci t ovsky' s and
Hi rsch' s not i on of t he i mport ance of emul at i ve behavi our i n economi c act i vi t y
as a way of j ust i f yi ng anot her l ook at t he prest i ge economy i n pri mi t i ve
soci et i es . Sect i on I I I of f ers some i l l ust rat i ons of how t he prest i ge economy
used goods or mat eri al obj ect s as symbol s of soci al di f f erent i at i on and
i nt erpersonal compari sons . Sect i on I V of f ers some suggest i ons f or appl yi ng
t he not i on of ranked cl asses of goods t o t he di al ect i c of needs and obj ect s i n
cont emporary soci et y .
I I : Emul at i on, Pecuni ary and Ot her
I n The Theory of t he Lei sure Cl ass Vebl en wrot e : "Wi t h t he except i on of t he
i nst i nct f or sel f - preservat i on, t he propensi t y f or emul at i on i s probabl y t he
st rongest and most al ert andpersi st ent of t he economi c mot i ves proper
. "g
One
can say t hat Vebl en sought t o depi ct t he prest i ge economy of a market soci et y.
The chapt er ent i t l ed "Pecuni ary Emul at i on" i s t he cent repi ece of The
Theory of t he Lei sure Cl ass . For Vebl en al l t he mani f est occupat i ons of a
market soci et y, not abl y t he accumul at i on of propert y, were f ound upon
anal ysi s t o have a l ess t angi bl e, but more st rongl y det ermi ni ng, source : "The
mot i ve t hat l i es at t he root of ownershi p i s emul at i on; . . . The possessi on of
weal t h conf ers honour ; i t i s an i nvi di ous di st i nct i on. " The f act t hat al l speci f i c
t ypes of weal t h can be reduced t o a si ngl e ( pecuni ary) st andard i n a
general i zed exchange economy i s t he deci si ve f act or i n t he way t hat t he
propensi t y f or emul at i on expresses
i t sel f i n
a
market soci et y . For t hen al l
t angi bl e f orms of weal t h are merel y t he moment ary si gns of rel at i ve success,
and do not have any l ast i ng si gni f i cance .
Apecuni ary st andard f or i nt erpersonal compari sons i s an abst ract ,
i nf i ni t el y mal l eabl e st andard . I ndi vi dual success i s a
st ri vi ng f or
a
hori zon of
soci al
honour t hat recedes wi t h every approach:
But as f ast as a person makes new acqui si t i ons, and
becomes accust omed t o t he resul t i ng new st andard of
weal t h, t he new st andard f ort hwi t h ceases t o af f ord
appreci abl y great er sat i sf act i on t han t he earl i er st andard
30
THEFETI SHI SMOFOBJ ECTS
di d . . .
So l ong as t he compari s on [ wi t h ot hers ] i s
di s t i nct l y unf avourabl e t o hi ms el f t he normal ,
average
i ndi vi dual
wi l l l i ve i n chroni c di s s at i s f act i on wi t h
hi s
pres ent l ot ; and
when he has reached what may be
cal l ed
t he normal pecuni ary
s t andard of t he communi t y, or of
hi s cl as s i n t he
communi t y, t hi s chroni c di s s at i s f act i on
wi l l gi ve pl ace t o
a res t l es s s t ri vi ng t o pl ace a wi der and
ever- wi deni ng
pecuni ary i nt erval bet ween hi ms el f and
t hi s average
s t andard.
The economi c growt h brought about by i ndus t ri al capi t al i s m
mul t i pl i es
opport uni t i es t o reap
mat eri al benef i t s f romt hi s res t l es s
s t ri vi ng, but not
wi t hout paradoxi cal
res ul t s , f or "no general i ncreas e of t he
communi t y' s
weal t h can make any approach
t o s at i at i ng t hi s need. " 9 Every
at t ai ned l evel i s
merel y t he j umpi ng- of f
poi nt f or anot her round of compet i t i ve
emul at i on
whi ch f eat ures newl y- devi s ed t okens
of s ucces s i n t he cons umer goods
arena .
I n
Vebl en' s vi ewcons pi cuous cons umpt i on
i s not conf i ned t o pers ons i n t he
hi gher
i ncome l evel s ; i t i s s i mpl y mos t cons pi cuous
t here. As a f undament al
economi c
mot i ve i t s t races are f ound uni vers al l y i n t he
ordi nary l i f e pat t erns
of al mos t everyone,
excl udi ng onl y t he very poores t pers ons
(whodi s pl ay i t as
s oon as t hey ceas e t o be
very poor) . I t mani f es t s i t s el f i n what
he cal l s t he
el ement of "cons pi cuous
or honori f i c was t e" - or t he
"quas i - decorat i ve"
as pect - pres ent i n
t he mundane s at i s f act i ons of l i f e' s neces s i t i es
. (He s eems
t o have i n mi ndeveryt hi ng t hat
exceeds t he s t ri ct l y f unct i onal mai nt enance
of
bi ol ogi cal
l i f e. ) Us i ng t he economi s t s ' t erm,
he s ugges t s t hat "many of t he
ut i l i t i es requi red
f or a comf ort abl e exi s t ence by
ci vi l i s ed men are of a
ceremoni al charact er . " 1 0
Us i ng Sahl i ns ' t ermi nol ogy one
woul d cal l t hi s t he
"s ymbol i c s t ruct ure i n
mat eri al ut i l i t y. "
Vebl en' s book, l i ke i t s aut hor,
occupi es a curi ous pl ace i n i t s f i el d. I t s
mai n
t hrus t
was as s umed t o be, by i t s admi rers and
det ract ors al i ke, cons onant wi t h
t he general s oci al i s t cri t i que
of bourgeoi s s oci et y . (Af ewreaders s ought
cl ari -
f i cat i on of i t s mes s age,
whi ch t hey f ound ambi guous , but
Vebl en s t eadf as t l y
ref us ed - as was hi s wont -
t o make i t more expl i ci t . ) Af t er
i t s i ni t i al
publ i cat i on, t he bookwas republ i s hed
of t enby s mal l l ef t - wi ng pres s es .
Yet i t s
emphas i s ont he uni vers al charact er of t he
propens i t y f or emul at i on, root ed (i t
i s i mpl i ed)
ei t her i n human nat ure or i n t he nat ure
of humans oci et y as s uch,
j ars wi t h t he s t andard
s oci al i s t t heory, whi chat t ri but es
s uch procl i vi t i es t ot he
di s t ort i ng ef f ect s of
capi t al i s t economi c rel at i ons .
Vebl en' s caut i on, conceal i ng hi s
own pos i t i on behi nd a
s moke- s creen of
bri l l i ant l y
i nvent i ve t ermi nol ogy, makes i t
di f f i cul t , i f not i mpos s i bl e,
t o
di s cern hi s poi nt . There
i s l i t t l e uncert ai nt y, however, about
t he s t rong
t echnocrat i c bent i n hi s t hi nki ng. The
anarchy of t he market pl ace
was t he
3 1
WI LLI AMLEI SS
chi ef evi l t o be overcome, and i t woul d be overcome by pl aci ng engi neers i n
command of soci et y' s product i ve apparat us . ' I We can onl y surmi se -si nce
Vebl en does not el aborat e -what i mpact such at ransf er woul d have ont he
ceremoni al charact er of everyday consumpt i onpat t erns . Woul d
t he engi neers
resol ve t o ext i rpat e t he emul at i ve propensi t y root andbranch, f or exampl e, by
i ssui ng one and onl y one t ype i n each product cat egory, such as shoes? Or
woul d t hey al l owt hat a cert ai n amount of vari at i on i n st yl e and mat eri al
composi t i on i s
st i l l wi t hi n t he boundari es of rat i onal desi re ( a t rue need) ,
al t hough what ever
exceededt he decreed l i mi t s ( f al se needs) woul dhave t o be
repressed?
For t he most part Vebl en' s work was t aken
seri ousl y by t hose who i nt er-
pret ed The Theory of t he Lei sure Cl ass
as
an
et hi cal obj ect i on t o t he f ri vol ous
excesses of upper-cl ass wast rel s . Thi s i nt erpret at i on
obscured t he real
di f f i cul t y i n hi s out l ook, namel y hi s apparent use
of a bl eak f unct i onal i st
st andard t o measure t he degree of "honori f i c
wast e" i n everyday l i f e. ( Hi s
personal househol d, wi t h i t s packi ng-crat e
f urni t ure and coarse wool
cl ot hi ng, seems t o i ndi cat e t hat he di d
i ndeed const rue f unct i onal i sm
narrowl y. ) Read as a general account of
i ndi vi dual behavi our at al l l evel s
( above t hat of
gri ndi ng povert y) i n a market soci et y, t he presumed
cri t i cal
t hrust
i n Vebl en' s bookl oses most ( i f not al l ) of i t s
f orce. One reason i s t hat
emul at i on appears rat her beni gn i n i t s consequences,
wheni t t akes t he f ormof
compet i t i on f or possessi ons . So f ar as I can t el l ,
Vebl en does not say t hat
wi despread
di f f erences i n weal t h
among soci al cl asses ( or
t he brut al
expl oi t at i on of t he poor' s l abour) i nevi t abl y
resul t f romi t . Thus i f t he propen-
si t y
i s
so evenl y di st ri but ed among t he popul at i on, and
i f i t s worki ngs are
rel at i vel y beni gn, i t woul d be sheer mi sant hropy t o compl ai n
of i t .
There i s anot her curi ous aspect . Vebl en chose as
hi s key concept ani dea
t hat had beencommon i n modern
soci al t hought f or a l ong t i me. The di rect
source f or i t was hi s readi ng
of t he pol i t i cal economy current i n hi s day.
The
emul at i ve propensi t y
was sai d t o be ani nsat i abl e want ont he i ndi vi dual
l evel
and
t he mot or of economi c progress ont he soci al l evel .
12
Perhaps Vebl en' s
ori gi nal obj ect i ve was si mpl y t o
bal ance i t s ent husi ast i c endorsement i n t he
t ext s of pol i t i cal economy
wi t h an account of what were f or hi mi t s l ess
savoury
charact eri st i cs . I n any event t he argument of The Theory
of t he
Lei sure Cl ass, l i ke t he rest of Vebl en' s t hought ,
remai ns somet hi ng of a
bast ard of f spri ng i n t he househol d of
t he soci al i st t heory whi ch chose t o adopt
i t .
Despi t e i t s
short comi ngs The Theory of t he Lei sure Cl ass cont i nues
t o be an
i nt erest i ng and
i mport ant book. The best evi dence of
t hi s
i s
t he t hemat i c
cont i nui t y bet weeni t andt he recent st udi es
by Sci t ovsky and Hi rsch.
13
Three
of t he pri nci pal t hemes i n
t he l at t er, as wel l as numerous subsi di ary poi nt s,
have t hei r anal ogues i n Vebl en' s
work ( t hey are not i dent i cal andi nany case
3 2
THEFETI SHI SMOFOBJ ECTS
ar e der i ved i ndependent l y) . Sci t ovsky' s "r ank- happi ness" and Hi r sch' s "posi -
t i onal compet i t i on" ar e mor e pr eci se f or mul at i ons, r el at ed t o
empi r i cal
evi dence, of t he pr opensi t y f or emul at i on. The ef f or t t o er ect what Vebl en
cal l ed "i nvi di ous di st i nct i ons" t hr ough open- ended goods accumul at i on, wi t h
pot ent i al l y i nf i ni t e per mut at i ons, has become, t hr ough t he pr ol i f er at i on of
t ypes of goods, hi gher per sonal i ncomes i n t he popul at i on as a whol e, and t he
omni pr esent mass communi cat i ons medi a, a r egul ar f eat ur e of ever yday l i f e.
The per vasi ve symbol i c mani pul at i ons whi ch l i nk goods
wi t h
i mages of
wel l -
bei ngal so t est i f y t o t he i mpor t ance of what Vebl en named, i n mor e el egant
l anguage, t he cer emoni al char act er of ut i l i t y.
I amper suaded by t he evi dence of f er ed by Sci t ovsky and Hi r sch t hat t he
i mpor t ance of t hi s vener abl e t heme i n soci al t hought cannot be
under est i mat ed. I bel i eve i t shoul d be r ecogni zed as a cent r al concept i n t he
t heor y of needs . I n t hat cont ext i t s i mmedi at e ef f ect i s t o under mi ne st at i c
cat egor i es and t o r equi r e mor e r el at i onal and cont ext ual ones . Fur t her mor e,
t he pr opensi t y f or emul at i on as a pr i nci pal dr i ve i n t he ar t i cul at i on of human
needs i s cl osel y r el at ed t o ( 1) soci al mechani sms of exchange i n bot h mar ket
and non- mar ket cont ext s and ( 2) t he symbol i c vei l cast over mat er i al obj ect s
i n cul t ur al t r adi t i ons .
My pr i mar y pur pose her e i s not t o suggest t hat i t i s ei t her possi bl e or
desi r abl e t o devi se a gener al t heor y of human needs wi t h t he not i ons of
emul at i on, exchange, and symbol i c det er mi nat i ons, but r at her t o ur ge t hat we
r econsi der t he concept s of r ei f i cat i on, commodi t y f et i shi sm, and f al se
consci ousness - as t he key concept s i n t he r adi cal cr i t i que of capi t al i st mar ket
r el at i ons
- wi t h t he ai d of such not i ons . Despi t e t he f act t hat t hese concept s
have been empl oyed i n t he r adi cal cr i t i que f or over a cent ur y, t hey r emai n
undevel oped and pr obl emat i c . We must knowmor e about t he r el at i onshi p
bet ween t he commodi t y f or mi n gener al , whi ch makes possi bl e an ext r emel y
f l ui d
and ever - changi ng f i el d of obj ect s f or t he sat i sf act i on of needs, and t he
st r uct ur ed char act er of human needi ng i t sel f ( assumi ng
t hat needs ar e
st r uct ur ed i n some way) . Mor eover , i f we mai nt ai n t hat t he commodi t y f or m
r epr esent s some ki nd of "l i mi t " t o t he ar t i cul at i on of needs, andf ur t her t hat i t
i s a l i mi t whi ch we shoul d st r i ve t o over come on account of i t s al l eged
del et er i ous ef f ect s, we must t r y t o say mor e cl ear l y what t he nat ur e of t hat
l i mi t i s, what
al t er nat i ve ar r angement s ar e possi bl e, andwhy we shoul d expect
t he maj or i t y of ci t i zens i n
i ndust r i al mar ket soci et i es t o opt f or an al t er nat i ve
way at some poi nt .
I n i t s hi gh- i nt ensi t y phase, wher e t he maj or i t y of ci t i zens have
access t o a
huge ar r ay of goods, t he mar ket soci et y t hr ows up i nvi di ous di st i nct i ons
ever ywher e.
We ar e ur ged const ant l y t o compar e t he advant ages of one br and
over anot her , one cl ass of goods over anot her , one mar gi nal i ncr ement
of
sat i sf act i on over anot her , one set of val ues over anot her , i ndeed one"l i f est yl e
33
WILLIAMLEISS
package" over anot her
. Yet what i s t he bas i s f or compar i s on? The
mar ket pl ace gr adual l y di s s ol ves f i xed
cus t omar y t r adi t i ons ( s uch as t he
di s t i nct i ve cui s i ne and dr es s of ol der et hni c or
nat i onal gr oups ) by whi ch t he
appr opr i at enes s of an i ndi vi dual ' s t as t es us ed t o
be j udged . In a moder n
mar ket s oci et y t he bas es of i nt er per s onal compar i s on change
cont i nuous l y. It
i s as
di f f i cul t t o anal yze t hos e s hi f t s as i t i s t o navi gat e t hem.
It i s t hi s di f f i cul t y i n l ocat i ng a f oot hol d f or anal ys i s t hat pr ompt s me
t o
s ugges t
t hat we s t ep back f or a moment and l ook at t he s t r uct ur ed
exchange
pr oces s es i n s ome
pr i mi t i ve s oci et i es . Thei r mor e l i mi t ed phys i cal di mens i ons
and as s or t ment of goods
t hr ows s ome of t he f eat ur es of t hei r exchange
r el at i ons hi ps i nt o
s har per r el i ef . Thi s by no means i mpl i es t hat t hos e
r el at i ons hi ps ar e
"s i mpl er " t han our own. When t hey ar e vi ewedi n r el at i on
t o
t he
f ul l
s et
of s oci al i nt er act i ons ( es peci al l y r eci pr oci t y i n ki ns hi p
r el at i ons ) t o
whi ch
t hey bel ong, t hei r compl exi t y i s i n f act over whel mi ng.
14
I di s cus s t hem
her e f or a par t i cul ar pur pos e i n abs t r act i on f r omt hei r
cont ext ual s et t i ng.
Her e we f i nd a f ami l i ar at t r i but e, t he pr opens i t y
f or emul at i on. It i s not
exact l y as a uni ver s al f eat ur e, but as a s uf f i ci ent l y
f r equent occur r ence i n
di f f er ent human cul t ur es , i n wi del y s epar at ed ar eas of
t he ear t h, t o war r ant
s peci al at t ent i on -nor was i t a
mer el y i nci dent al f eat ur e of t hos e s oci et i es .
The "des i r e f or emul at i on",
Fi r t h wr i t es , was "t he i ndus t r i al s pur of t he ol d
Maor i economy. "
15
The
or i gi ns
of
t he dual economy ( s ubs i s t ence and pr es t i ge) i n pr i mi t i ve
s oci et y
need not concer n us her e. The s peci f i c nat ur e of t he dual i t y var i es
cons i der abl y, but t he f ol l owi ng char act er i s t i cs ar e common:
( 1)
each of
t he
t wo "economi es " has i t s
own t ypes of goods or obj ect s ; ( 2) goods ar ecl as s i f i ed
i n r anked,
di s cont i nuous , or i ncommens ur abl e s pher es of exchanges ; ( 3)
s oci al
di f f er ent i at i on, i ncl udi ng t he at t r i but e of pr es t i ge, i s r el at ed t o
mani pul at i ons of a s peci f i c cl as s of goods , not al l goods ;
( 4)
pr es t i ge
goods
r ef l ect a del i ber at el y or ar t i f i ci al l y cr eat ed s car ci t y
whi ch s t ems f r omt he
ar bi t r ar y
as cr i pt i on
of s ymbol i c
s i gni f i cance t o mat er i al obj ect s .
III : Spher es of
Exchange
Raymond
Fi r t h has comment ed t hat we s houl d not t ake t hi s
di s t i nct i on t o
meant hat t het wot ypes of act i vi t y ar e r i gi dl y s epar at ed.
Ther ear e commonl y
s ome over l appi ng poi nt s bet ween
t hem. "What i s us ef ul , however , i n s uch
l abel s i s t he di r ect i ng of our
at t ent i on t o maj or over t el ement s i n t he demand
s chedul e of
t heeconomi c s ys t em, pr i mi t i ve or advanced. Suchnot i ons
i nvol ve
a s epar at i on i n t he qual i t y of want s . "
16
Goods and obj ect s ar e
cl as s i f i ed i nt o
t wo maj or cat egor i es ( t her e ar ef ur t her s ubdi vi s i ons , as
wes hal l s ee) , eachwi t h
a mode of exchange appr opr i at e t o i t : bar t er
ont heonehand, andobj ect s t hat
3 4
THEFETI SHI SMOFOBJ ECTS
ser ve as medi a of exchange f or st at us val ues ont he ot her . These ar e t he vi si bl e
mani f est at i ons of t he st r uct ur ed char act er of needs or want s, f or t he t wo
act i vi t i es
ar e nor mal l y kept qui t e di st i nct byvi r t ue of segr egat i ngt he ki nds of
goods
t hought t o be appr opr i at e t o each t ype. Howcommont hi s i s may be
seen i n t he spher es
of exchange devi sed by di f f er ent cul t ur es . 1 7
Af ai r l y si mpl e and st r ai ght f or war d
di vi si on i s cust omar y i n Ponapea, one
of t he Car ol i ne I sl ands i n Mi cr onesi a. The subsi st ence
economy consi st s of
f ood, cl ot hi ng, and shel t er i t ems or di nar i l y pr oduced
and consumed by
househol d member s . Foodconsi st s of smal l yams,
bananas,
f r esh br eadf r ui t ,
coconut , and seaf ood. The
pr est i ge economy i s l ar gel y conf i ned t o t he annual
f east s, whi ch f eat ur e compet i t i on
among i ndi vi dual s wi t h r espect t o t wo
goods, bot h f ood
i t ems : ver y l ar ge yams andbr eadf r ui t agedf or l ong per i ods
i n l eaf wr appi ngs . Gr owi ng t he l ar ger yams r equi r es speci al ski l l s andcar ef ul
t endi ngf or . year s ; t he pl aces wher e t hey ar e gr ownar e conceal edandt hey ar e
t endedi nsecr et , usual l y under cover of dar kness . The f l avour of t he br eadf r ui t
i mpr oves wi t h age; t he wr appi ngs must be changedper i odi cal l y, andpr est i ge
i s r el at ed t o t he age of t he i t em. Bot har e br ought t o t he f east s andshar ed, and
a
consensus i s r eached on t he r el at i ve qual i t y of t he of f er i ngs .
1 8
The best - known exampl e of pr est i ge compet i t i on i n Nor t h Amer i ca i s of
cour se t hat whi ch occur r ed among t he Kwaki ut l of Br i t i sh Col umbi a, who
l i ved i n a r egi on of gr eat nat ur al abundance : "The Kwaki ut l , even mor e t han
most peopl es i n t he wor l d, wer e obsessed wi t h r ank - i ndeed, i nt he mi dst of
such pl ent y t hey cr eat ed ar t i f i ci al shor t ages i n t he soci al syst emand t hei r
st r i vi ng f or hi gh soci al posi t i on was an i nt egr al par t of t he economy. " 1 9
Subsi st ence goods di d not f i gur e at al l i n t he pr est i ge compet i t i on, whi ch was
conf i ned t o j ust t wo ki nds of obj ect s, bl anket s and l ar ge pi eces of engr aved
copper . Compet i t i on
among pot l at ch
r i val s
i nvol ved i ncr easi ng number s of
bl anket s, unt i l one
ended i t by
of f er i ng
a copper pi ece; t hi s compet i t i on was
endedi n t ur n by t he dest r uct i on of copper pi eces, t he vi ct or y
goi ngt o t he one
whowas deemedt o have dest r oyedt he pi ece of gr eat est val ue. The r i val r y was
st r uct ur ed as a conver si on of desi gnat ed obj ect s i n a r i t ual i zed ser i es of
exchanges whi ch
cul mi nat ed by t r ansl at i ng mat er i al val ues "i nt o t he pur est
val ue: r eput at i on" (Bohannan) .
Bohannan' s wor k on t he economyof t he Ti v
of f er s one of t he best exampl es
of r anked and di scont i nuous spher es of exchange. I nt he
subsi st ence economy
ar e i ncl uded f ood (yams, cer eal s, veget abl es, seasoni ngs, chi cken, goat s,
sheep),
househol d ut ensi l s (mor t ar s, gr i ndst ones, cal abashes, basket s, pot s) .
and some
t ool s. Exchanges among t hemt ake pl ace by gi f t gi vi ng and i n a
mar ket whi ch
t r adi t i onal l y used no money, onl y bar t er . The pr est i ge economy
i s t wo- t i er ed. One cat egor y i ncl udes sl aves,
cat t l e, r i t ual of f i ces, a speci al t ype
of cl ot h,
medi ci nes, and br ass r ods. Exchanges among t hese t ake pl ace at
cer emoni al and
ot her speci al occasi ons onl y, andwi t bi n t hi s cat egor y br ass
35
WI LLI AMLEI SS
rods
serve as amedi umof exchange. Abovet hi s cat egoryst ands anot her wi t h
a si ngl e "good": t he exchange of ri ght s i n women.
The ranki ngof t he spheres i s cruci al . Transact i ons of goods bet weent he
spheres i s necessary, f or exampl ewhenal argeamount of f ood i s requi red f or
a
f east and must be pai d f or wi t h brass rods, or whent he
rods were used t o
purchase a wi f e. But one st ri ves
t o avoi d
exchangi ng
hi gher- cat egory goods
f or l ower- cat egory ones, and he who. must
do so
suf f ers
l oss
of prest i ge
.
(The
brass rods are onl y at rue equi val ent wi t hi n t hesecondcat egory. )
Conversel y,
one st ri ves t o
convert l ower- cat egory goods i nt o t he hi gher. z
0
Ri chard Sal i sbury
pai d speci al
at t ent i on
t o spheres of exchangei nhi s st udy
of t he Si ane
peopl e of t he NewGui neahi ghl ands, andont hebasi s of hi s work
i t i s possi bl e t o make some f i ner di scri mi nat i ons t hat may appl y t o ot her
exampl es
di scussed above
.
He f ound i t necessary t o di st i ngui sh not t wo but
t hree "nexuses of act i vi t y" i n economi c l i f e, each of whi chcorresponds t o a
di st i nct i ve
assort ment of goods andobj ect s used excl usi vel y i nrel at i on t o i t .
Hi s di scussi onst resses t he cruci al anddet ermi ni ngrol e t hat t hedi scont i nuous
spheres of exchange pl ay i n t he soci al l i f e of t he group. He cal l s t hemt he
subsi st ence, l uxury, and ceremoni al nexuses of act i vi t y.
Subsi st ence goods
i ncl ude everyday f oodi t ems (sweet pot at oes and ot her
veget abl es) , t ool s, cl ot hi ng,
and
housi ng. Theyareproducedbot hi ndi vi dual l y
and col l ect i vel y wi t hi n each cl an and responsi bi l i t y f or produci ng t hemi s
shared i nf ormal l y i n
t hat cont ext . These act i vi t i es
mai nt ai n
bot ht he accept ed
ki nshi p rel at i ons i n
t he group and t he basi c consumpt i on
l evel
enj oyed by
everyone. They provi de a mi ni mal consumpt i on"f l oor" f or each i ndi vi dual
and are deri ved f romnat ural mat eri al s t hat are rel at i vel y pl ent i f ul .
Luxury goods encompass t obacco, pal moi l , pandanus nut s, sal t , snake-
ski ns f or drums, st one f or axe- bl ades, and pal mwood f or spears. These are
produced or acqui red by i ndi vi dual i ni t i at i ve, are exchanged on t he basi s of
reci proci t y, andt he
di rect consumpt i oni t ems among
t hemare enj oyedei t her
pri vat el y or i n ent ert ai ni ng vi si t ors, where "generosi t y" i s avi rt ue. Thi s i s a
ki nd of i nt ermedi at e cat egory of goods, whi ch al l ows f or t he expressi on of
di f f erent i ndi vi dual pref erences (unl i ke t he subsi st ence sphere, where t here i s
l i t t l e
or no vari at i on) , and seems t o work agai nst excessi ve ri gi di t y
i n
soci al
behavi our
by
permi t t i ngt he i nt roduct i onof newgoodsandpract i ces t hrough
i ndi vi dual i ni t i at i ve.
Ceremoni al goods are val uabl es exchangedby bart er at publ i c event s. Thi s
cat egory i ncl udes shel l s, ornament al axes, neckl aces, pl umes, headdresses,
and pi gs . Exchanges t ake pl ace bot hwi t hi nandamongcl ans andt hey creat e
ret urn obl i gat i ons ; t hi s i s an arena of "st ri ct reci proci t y" where a det ai l ed
account i ngof
val ue
i s
kept .
Thei ndi vi dual - and by associ at i ont he cl anof
whi ch he
i s
a member - creat e obl i gat i ons t o t hemsel ves f romot hers i n
maki ngpresent at i ons of ceremoni al goods, and t hus i ncrease hi s and t hei r
36
THEFETI SHI SMOF
OBJ ECTS
pr est i ge. I t i s al so t he means of soci al mobi l i t y
f or t he i ndi vi dual wi t hi n hi s cl an
.
Ther e i s ver y l i t t l e cr ossi ng of t he
boundar i es bet weent he di f f er ent t ypes of
goods
; t he onl y one ment i oned
speci f i cal l y by Sal i sbur y i s t he i nf r equent
exchange of pi gs f or sal t ( t he l at t er
i s ver y scar ce and i s a monopol y of t he cl an
whi ch occupi es t he onl y sal t deposi t )
. The bar r i er s among goods and
obj ect s
ar e at t he same t i me t he
st r uct ur i ng char act er i st i cs of soci al r el at i ons:
"The
mor e gener al r ul e i s t hat
commodi t i es ar e used onl y i n si t uat i ons
wher e t he
nexus of act i vi t y i s
cl ear l y one of i nt ea- cl an hel p, i nt er - cl an
pr esent at i on, or
exchange bet ween
t r ade f r i ends ; no commodi t y can be used
i n an ambi guous
si t uat i on. "
2 i
Not
onl y ar e cer emoni al goods never
exchanged f or f ood or
l uxur i es, but
per sons who exchange t he l at t er t wo
cannot al so exchange t he
f or mer .
Of speci al i nt er est t o Sal i sbur y
was t he f act t hat he wi t nessed t he i mpact
of a
newt echnol ogy ( st eel
r at her t han st one f or axe- bl ades) on
t he cl osed, hi er ar -
chi cal spher es of exchange
. The f ar gr eat er ef f i ci ency and
dur abi l i t y of t he
st eel bl ades
r el eased si gni f i cant amount s of new
"f r ee t i me" f or t he
popul at i on
. Ther e was no change i n t he pr oduct i on of
t ypes of subsi st ence
goods, si nce t hi s
coul d not have happened wi t hout di sr upt i ng
f undament al
r ol e
r el at i onshi ps ( onl y menownand use axes t o cl ear
pl ant i ng ar eas - whi ch
woment hen t end -
and t o bui l d houses) . Rat her , t he new
t i me was absor bed
excl usi vel y
i n ext endi ng t he spher e of pr est i ge
compet i t i on - t he most el ast i c
ar ea of demand,
t o use t he economi st s' t er m- by
f i ght i ng and by exchangi ng
t he
mat er i al t okens of pr est i ge .
Sal i sbur y gi ves an excel l ent summar y st at ement of t he soci al
f unct i ons
per f or med by t he di scont i nuous spher es of exchange
and t he st r uct ur ed
char act er of t he needs f or whi ch t hey ar e t he means of
sat i sf act i on:
. . . t he pr esence i n non- monet ar y soci et i es of di scr et e
scal es of val ue . . . i s a si mpl e mechani smi nsur i ng
t hat
subsi st ence goods ar e used t o mai nt ai n a basi c st andar d
of l i f e bel owwhi ch no one f al l s ; t hat
f r ee- f l owi ng power
[ pr est i ge] i s al l ocat ed peacef ul l y,
wi t h a mi ni mumof
expl oi t at i on ( or di st ur bance
of t he i ndi vi dual ' s r i ght t o
subsi st ence) and
i n accor dance wi t h accept ed st andar ds ;
t hat
t he means of i nsur i ng f l exi bi l i t y i n t he soci et y do not
di sr upt t he f or mal al l ocat i on of st at uses i n t he soci et y or
t he
means of gai ni ng power . 2 2
Af t er compar i ng t he r anked spher es of exchange
among t he Si ane wi t h
anal ogous pr act i ces el sewher e, Sal i sbur y of f er s
a way of l ooki ng at at l east
37
WI LLI AMLEI SS
some commodi t i es i n our soci et y f r omt hi s per spect i ve. Hesuggest s t hat i n
i mpor t ant goods, l i ke t he aut omobi l e, t he t hr ee nexuses of act i vi t y ar e mi xed
t oget her but t hat i t i s al so possi bl e t o di st i ngui sh t hemanal yt i cal l y . Ther ei s a
"subsi st ence"
nexus i n r espect
t o i t s mani f est use- val ue ( i t conveys
passenger s) ,
a l uxur y nexus i n al l t he opt i onal
"ext r as" f or gr eat er comf or t
and conveni ence t hat most pur chaser s choose, and
a cer emoni al or pr est i ge
nexus i n t he
compar at i ve l evel s
of si z e, st yl e, , and cost .
2 3
Thr ee poi nt s ar e wor t hy of not ei n at t empt i ng t o assess t hese mat er i al s f or
compar at i ve pur poses. They concer n t he st r uct ur ed nat ur eof needs or want s,
t he r el at i on bet ween pr est i ge andt ypes of obj ect s, and t he quest i on whet her
one may pr oper l y speak of a f et i shi smof obj ect s i n t hi s cont ext .
Thehi er ar chi cal anddi scont i nuous spher es of exchangear ei n a senseonl y
t he vi si bl e mani f est at i on of qual i t at i ve di st i nct i ons i n t he assor t ment of
human needs. Rat her t han emer gi ng as an undi f f er ent i at ed ser i es, of a mer el y
quant i t at i ve scope, human needs appear - uni ver sal l y, I t hi nk i t i s saf et osay
- i n gr oups or cl ust er s t hat r ef l ect ef f or t s t o def i ne meani ngf ul , "compl et e"
spher es of act i vi t y . The number of di scr et e and i dent i f i abl e needs andt hei r
obj ect s
i n any
spher e
seems l ess si gni f i cant , on t he whol e, t han t he nat ur eof
t he qual i t at i ve di st i nct i ons whi ch mar k t he boundar i es bet ween t hem. Yet i n
r emar ki ng t hi s pat t er n one must be at t ent i ve t o t he r i ch var i at i ons i n det ai l
t hat l end i t col our . Thei mpor t ant poi nt i s t hepr i nci pl e of st r uct ur eddi scr i mi -
nat i on. At t empt s t o pi n i t down t oopr eci sel y, not abl y Masl ow' s hi er ar chy of
needs, t r i vi al i z e t he pr ocess of needi ng; f or i n or der t o achi eve suf f i ci ent
gener al i t y, t he cat egor i es of anal ysi s must be r educed t ot hei r bar r en skel et al
out l i ne. ( Thi nk of "f ood", on t he one hand, and t he mar vel ous over -
i ndul gencei n a f east cer emony by
whi ch a f el l owt r i es t o augment hi s pr est i ge,
on t he ot her . ) Any r esear ch scheme ut i l i z i ng t he pr i nci pl e of st r uct ur ed
di scr i mi nat i on shoul d devel op i t s speci f i c anal yt i cal cat egor i es i n a di al ogue
wi t h speci f i c empi r i cal mat er i al s.
2 4
Agr eat var i et y of goods or obj ect s ar e empl oyed as pr est i ge
t okens, as we
haveseen. Thi sst ems f r om
t he ver y nat ur eof t he ent er pr i se. What i s r equi r ed
i s
a physi cal count er f or human r el at i onshi ps, an ar bi t r ar i l y- chosen si gn f or a
compl ex set of at t r i but es ( ski l l , i ni t i at i ve, i nher i t ed st at us, l uck, ambi t i on,
cour age, and sof or t h) . What t he gr oup of count er s must beabl e t o si gni f y i s
t he r equi si t e degr ee of di scr i mi nat i on i n t he pr ocess of soci al di f f er ent i at i on.
Wher e t her e ar e many accept ed compet i t or s f or pr est i ge, f or exampl e, t he set
of t okens as a whol e must be suf f i ci ent l y di vi si bl e so t hat i t i s possi bl e t o
di scer n t he r el at i ve success of each. Pr est i ge t okens r ef l ect ar t i f i ci al
scar ci t i es,
and such scar ci t i es may be mul t i pl i ed i ndef i ni t el y as
t he need f or f i ner
di scr i mi nat i ons ar i ses. They may or may not
embody si gni f i cant amount s of
ski l l ed l abour , ar t i st i c t al ent , or pr eci ous nat ur al
mat er i al s. Theonl y gener al
r equi r ement i s t hat t hey be kept separ at e f r om
subsi st ence uses.
3 8
THEFETISHISMOF
OBJECTS
Whether we shoul d speak here of
a"f eti shi smof obj ects" i s partl y a matter
of def i ni ti on, si nce many of
these soci eti es have f eti sh- devi ces i n the stri ct
sense - i . e. ,
obj ects thought capabl e of perf ormi ng operati ons ( spel l s,
wi tchcraf t)
on
persons - that are not the sameas thei r presti ge tokens, i t i s
probabl y unwi se to do so . If by a f eti sh we ref er to any si tuati on i n
whi cha
materi al obj ect "stands f or" a soci al rel ati on ( thus
maki ng i t vi rtual l y
synonymous wi th what i s i ntended by the concept of rei f i cati on) ,
and
especi al l y i f al l such si tuati ons are thought to be unf ortunate by thei r very
nature, di f f i cul ti es
ari se
. 2 5
For to markasoci al rel ati on bymeans of amateri al
thi ng i s
preci sel y what presti ge tokens are i ntended to do. Moreover, most
soci eti es
whi ch empl oy themcl earl y recogni ze that these soci al rel ati ons
themsel ves - i . e. , the process of soci al di f f erenti ati on through presti ge
competi ti on - are
potenti al l y dangerous i n thei r consequences, and they have
expl i ci t, wel l - establ i shed
countervai l i ng mechani sms ( e. g. , redi stri buti on) to
contai n thosedangers . 2 6 They do not seemto beat al l mysti f i ed, f or exampl e,
by the rei f i ed f orms of those soci al rel ati onshi ps . Thus i t does
not
appear
j usti f i abl e to me to vi ewthe presti ge economy of pri mi ti ve soci eti es as an
expressi on of the f eti shi smof obj ects .
Wemay nowturn to thequesti on of what beari ngthesethreepoi nts have on
the di al ecti c of needs and obj ects i n our i ndustri al
market soci ety . In appl yi ng
thi s comparati ve perspecti ve we are encouraged
to l ook f or the structured
di scri mi nati ons of needs that may be present, and ( i f we thi nk wedo di scern
evi dence of them) to ask howthey
express themsel ves i n rel ati on to the
abstract equi val ence i n the f i el d of
obj ects ( exchangeval ueor the commodi ty
f orm) . Wecan ask howthe pecuni ary f ormof the propensi ty f or emul ati on,
whi ch ari ses i n a market exchange soci ety based on commodi ty producti on,
di f f ers i n i ts characteri sti cs and soci al consequences f rom
the non- pecuni ary
f ormbased on di sconti nuous spheres of exchange. For exampl e, i f weaccept
Sal i sbury' s cl ai m about the conf l ati on of di f f erent nexuses of acti vi ty i n a
uni f orm sphere of market- exchange goods, we mi ght ask: What are the
i ndi vi dual and soci al consequences, i f
any, of pursui ngpresti gecompeti ti on i n
a si tuati on
where al l
easi l y- recogni zabl e di sti ncti ons between presti ge and
non- presti ge categori es have col l apsed? Fi nal l y, i s i t possi bl e to ground the
concepts of rei f i cati on and the f eti shi smof commodi ti es f or our soci ety i n the
col l apsi ng of spheres of exchange?
IV: Commodi ty Feti shi smOnce More
Jean Baudri l l ard opens hi s book, Lesystemedes obj ets,
wi ththef ol l owi ng
questi ons : "Can onecl assi f y the i mmense vegetati on of obj ects l i ke f l ora and
f auna, wi th tropi cal and northern speci es, abrupt mutati ons, and
39
WI LLI AMLEI SS
di sappear i ngspeci es? . . . Canonehopet ocl assi f y aconst ant l y changi ngwor l d
of obj ect s
and ar r i ve at a descr i pt i ve syst em?" Toanswer t hemhe devel ops a
scheme based on cat egor i es suchas ar r angement and envi r onment , t oget her
wi t h var i ous sub- cat egor i es, and concl udes wi t h hi s f i r st pr esent at i on of t he
t hesi s ( el abor at ed i n l at er books) t hat consumpt i on t oday i nvol ves t he
"syst emat i c mani pul at i on of si gns" whi ch as a whol e f or ma
behavi our al
"code" . Thi s means ( so f ar as I can under st and t he t hesi s) t hat obj ect s t end t o
l ose any subst ant i al l i nk wi t h di scr et e domai ns of act i vi t y ( eat i ng,
f or
exampl e) - an "i nt er i or " r el at i on - and const i t ut e an
ext er nal l y- r el at ed
ser i es or mer e col l ect i on of t hi ngs whi chonl y r epr esent abst r act desi gnat i ons
( "col oni al " f ur ni t ur e, "spor t y" cl ot hi ng, "gour met " f r ozen f oods) . "
Baudr i l l ar d i s one of a number of Fr ench t heor i st s f or whom
symbol i c
det er mi nat i ons pr ovi de t he key f or under st andi ng
gener al i zed commodi t y
pr oduct i on. z8 Baudr i l l ar d ext ends t he semi ol ogi cal appr oach
t o embr ace
pol i t i cal economy and suggest s t hat t her e i s a st r i ct
anal ogy bet ween t he
nat ur e of a si gnandt he nat ur e of t he commodi t y f or m. The
t wo- f ol d char act er
of t he si gn, as si gni f i er ( t he si gn' s mani f est f or m) andas
si gni f i ed ( i t s meani ng) ,
dupl i cat es t he dual i t y of use val ue ( t he mat er i al
or ut i l i t ar i an aspect ) and
exchange val ue ( t he r el at i on
wi t h ot her t hi ngs) i n t he commodi t y . I n
D' Ami co' s wor ds:
"We ar e t ounder st and t he connect i onas f ol l ows : exchange
val ue and si gni f i er desi gnat e r el at i onal f or ms, wher eas use val ue and
t he
si gni f i ed st and f or t he cont ent or obj ect of t he
r el at i ons . "
Baudr i l l ar d wi shes t o f ound, on t hi s basi s,
a t heor y of t he f et i shi smof
commodi t i es t hat i s
di f f er ent f r omMar x' s . He under st ands Mar x' s t heor y as
l i nki ng t hi s f et i shi sm sol el y t o one si de
( exchange val ue) of t he commodi t y
f or m, si nce t he ot her ( use
val ue) i s an unambi guous qual i t y, t he commodi t y' s
capaci t y
f or sat i sf yi ng some human need. Baudr i l l ar d mai nt ai ns,
i n
opposi t i on t o
t hi s r eadi ng of Mar x, t hat ut i l i t y or use val ue i s j ust as muchan
abst r act f or mof t he obj ect as i s exchange val ue:
For t her e
t o be exchange val ue i t i s al r eady necessar y t hat
ut i l i t y become t he pr i nci pl e of r eal i t y f or t he obj ect as
pr oduct . Exchange pr esupposes t hat
t he obj ect s ar e
al r eady r at i onal i zedas
usef ul . The r educt i on t o ut i l i t y i s
t he basi s f or bot h exchange and syst emat i zat i on - t he
pr econdi t i ons, i n Baudr i l l ar d, f or f et i shi sm( whi ch he
def i nes as t he r educt i on of t he
symbol i c- ambi val ent t o t he
syst emat i c- equi val ent ) . For Baudr i l l ar d exchange and
t he equi val ence- f or mar e made possi bl e by an
obj ect ' s
bei ng made compar abl e t hr ough
t he common denomi na-
t or
of
f unct i onal - r at i onal . ( Onl y t he obj ect s of symbol i c
40
THEFETI SHI SM
OFOBJ ECTS
exchange r et ai n t hei r t r ue
si ngul ar i t y and i ncommen-
sur abi l i t y) . Ther ef or e,
t o be mor e r adi cal t han Mar x i s t o
see t he pr i or i t y of
t he obj ect f or mover t he commodi t y
f or m
.
2 9
Thi s passage shows what i s
f or Baudr i l l ar d t he cr i t er i on f or
di st i ngui shi ng
f et i shi zed f r omnon- f et i shi zed
exchanges . The l at t er i s r est r i ct ed
t o event s
whi ch
have( al l egedl y) an i r r educi bl e si ngul ar i t y
; exampl es ar e gi f t - gi vi ngand
t he f east
cer emoni es of pr i mi t i ve soci et i es .
Appar ent l y al l r educt i ons t o a
st andar d of
equi val ence ar e a f or mof f et i shi sm.
Ther e i s much of
val ue i n Baudr i l l ar d' s wor k. He was
( t o t he best of my
knowl edge) t hef i r st
sympat het i c r eader of Mar x t o
ar gueagai nst t he st andar d
Mar xi st f or mul at i on of t he concept
of commodi t y f et i shi sm. 3 0
Hi s i s al so an
ef f ect i ve
chal l enge t o any who l ocat e t he
pr obl emat i c aspect of capi t al i st
mar ket r el at i ons sol el y i n t he
commodi t y f or mper se and whor egar d
t he
r el at i on of need and use
val ue as unambi guous . These advant ages,
however ,
ar e l ar gel y negat ed by
i t s def ect s, whi ch ar i se bot hf r omi t s dubi ous
t heor et i cal
st ance and
f r oma st yl e of expr essi on not abl e f or i t s
consi st ent hyper bol e.
Baudr i l l ar d' s concept of f et i shi smi s soal l - encompassi ng
t hat i t over whel ms
t he dat a of exper i ence i t seeks t o addr ess .
For someaspect of equi val ence i s a
necessar y
par t of al l exchange. Tobe sur e t he
equi val ence r epr esent ed i n
exchange based on r eci pr oci t y i s not t he same
as t hat r epr esent ed i n
commodi t y exchange, but i t i s a
ki nd of equi val ence nonet hel ess . I t i s
cust omar y - bot h i n pr i mi t i ve
soci et i es andi n our own- not t o
cal cul at et oo
f i nel y t he exchange
val ue of a si ngl e gi f t , but wher e
t he par t i es t o gi f t
exchanges ar e of t he same st at us any l ong- t er m
i mbal ance wi l l be r egar ded as
a del i ber at e af f r ont . Si mi l ar l y mar ket and
non- mar ket exchanges i ngener al ,
whi ch empl oy var yi ngst andar ds of
equi val ence, r ef l ect qual i t at i vel y di f f er ent
cont ext s of soci al
r el at i ons . The cont r ast of
"syst emat i c- equi val ent " wi t h
"symbol i c- ambi val ent "
pr event s us f r ommaki ng
t he necessar y di scr i mi na-
t i ons among di ver se cont ext s of
exchange r el at i onshi ps .
Baudr i l l ar d' s appr oach i s a
pr i me exampl e of what we mi ght t er ma
pr emat ur e concept ual
synt hesi s, pr emat ur e i n t wosenses .
Fi r st , i t t er mi nat es
t he di al ogue
bet ween anal yt i cal concept s andempi r i cal dat a
al most as soonas
i t has begun; t hef or mer exer ci ses an
aut hor i t at i vesway, sot ospeak, whi ch t he
l at t er i s not per mi t t ed t o chal l enge
. Second, i t f or ecl oses on t he r ange
of
quest i ons t hat mi ght be
posed as t he i nqui r y pr oceeds . For
exampl e, i f we
i nsi st t hat "t he
samel ogi c ( and t hesame f et i shi sm) i s at
wor kont het wosi des
of t he commodi t y speci f i ed by Mar x, use
val ue and exchange val ue", 3 ' we
have i n ef f ect deci ded
a pr i or i not t o al l owt he dat a t o
showany si gni f i cant
el ement s of
t ensi on bet ween t he t wo si des t hat may be
pr esent i n our
exper i ence wi t h commodi t y exchange pr oduct i on
.
4 1
WILLIAMLEISS
Themore measuredapproach of Marshal l Sahl i ns rescues t hese mat eri al s
f romsuchconcept ual aut archy andt hus hol ds open newl i nes of i nqui ry. Hi s
emphasi s on "t he symbol i cst ruct ure i n mat eri al ut i l i t y" does not t empt hi mt o
reduce t he concept of ut i l i t y ( use val ue) t o some al l egedl y morepri mordi al
"obj ect f orm" or t o di ssol ve t he dynami c t ensi on bet ween use val ue and
exchangeval ue. Rat her, he opens up t he concept of ut i l i t y i t sel f i n order t o
search
f or t he di f f erent i at ed st ruct ures of meani ng wi t hi n, i n order t o repai r
t he
i mbal ance f ound i n Marx' s work. He ci t es t he Grundri sse: "The
commodi t y
i t sel f appears as uni t y of t woaspect s. It i s use val ue, i . e. , obj ect of
t he sat i sf act i on of any syst emwhat ever of human needs. Thi s i s i t s mat eri al
si de, whi ch
t he most di sparat e epochs of product i on may have i n common,
and whose exami nat i on
t heref ore l i es beyond pol i t i cal economy. " 3 2 He
suggest s t hat wemust ext end t he i nvest i gat i on of commodi t y product i on by
di ssect i ng t he mat eri al si de:
Themat eri al f orces t aken byt hemsel ves arel i f el ess. Thei r
speci f i c mot i ons and det ermi nat e consequences can be
st i pul at ed onl y by progressi vel y compoundi ng t hem
wi t h
t he coordi nat es of t he cul t ural order
. . .
An i ndust ri al
t echnol ogy i n i t sel f does not di ct at e whet her i t wi l l berun
by men or by women, i n t he day or at ni ght , by wage
l aborers or by col l ect i ve owners, on Tuesday or on
Sunday, f or a prof i t or f or a' l i vel i hood; i n t he servi ce of
nat i onal securi t y or pri vat e gl ut t ony; t o producehand- f ed
dogs or st al l - f ed cat t l e, bl ue col l ars or whi t e dresses; t o
pol l ut e t he ri vers and i nf ect t he at mosphere or t o i t sel f
sl owl y rust away l i ke t he Si nger sewi ng machi ne posed
maj est i cal l y i n f ront of t he house of an Af ri can Chi ef . 3 3
At heory t hat i gnores t he i nt er- penet rat i on of t he concret e mat eri al and
cul t ural ( symbol i c) det ermi nant s i n t he sat i sf act i on of needs, rest ri ct i ng i t sel f
i nst ead ent i rel y t o i t s f ormal st ruct ure ( t he commodi t y f ormunder capi t al i st
rel at i ons of
product i on) , wi l l remai n unabl e t o expl ai n processes of soci al
change
i n preci sel y t hat ki ndof soci et y whi cht het heory pret ends t ohaveas i t s
obj ect of anal ysi s - a soci et y where t he sel f - underst andi ng of persons has
been f ormed under condi t i ons of f ul l y
devel oped capi t al i st market rel at i ons.
Ut i l i t y i s not const i t ut ed excl usi vel y by t he propert i es of agoodbut i nst ead
by t herel at i on bet weent hemandt he demandschedul es of persons: t hi s much
i s al ready
convent i onal wi sdomi n margi nal ut i l i t y t heory. However, i n
def i ni ng ut i l i t y as no more t han "psychol ogi cal ut i l i t y" t hi s t heory i mme-
42
THEFETI SHI SM
OF
OBJ ECTS
di at el y shor t - ci r cui t s
di scussi on of t he soci al and cul t ur al det er mi nant s of
i ndi vi dual psychol ogy. The "pr ocess of soci al l i f e i n whi ch men r eci pr ocal l y
def i ne obj ect s i n t er ms of
t hemsel ves and t hemsel ves i n t er ms of obj ect s"
34
i s
her e
r educed t o i t s cr udest di mensi ons . So t he consumer behavi our
r esear cher s l abour t o
f i nd di r ect cor r el at i ons bet ween an i ndi vi dual ' s
per sonal i t y at t r i but es and
hi s or her pr ef er ences f or speci f i c br ands . One st udy
f ound a si gni f i cant cor r el at i on bet ween t he at t r i but e "need f or domi nance
super i or t o need f or
af f i l i at i on" and a pr ef er ence f or For ds over Chevr ol et s
and
vi ce ver sa
.
Unf or t unat el y t hese st udi es as a whol e showed t hat , al t hough
par t i cul ar cor r el at i ons wer e of t en si gni f i cant , t he r esul t s coul d not be
gener al i zed acr oss pr oduct t ypes
. 35
I n f act a cul t ur al syst em
of i nt er pr et at i on ( cal l ed a "code" by t hose who
f ol l ow t he Fr ench t heor i st s)
i nt er venes bet ween per sons and obj ect s . I t
i ncl udes aut onomous domai ns, not det er mi ned by t he mode of pr oduct i on,
t hat st r uct ur e i ndi vi dual exper i ence and behavi our . Sahl i ns di scusses t wo
exampl es i n Nor t h Amer i can l i f e t oday, i nvol vi ngf ood and cl ot hi ng. The uses
of ani mal s f or meat ar e st r uct ur ed i n a number of ways, i ncl udi ng edi bl e
( cat t l e and pi gs) ver sus i nedi bl e ( dogs and hor ses) sour ces and a hi er ar chy of
pr ef er ences wi t h r espect t o edi bl e sour ces ( f l esh ver sus
or gan
par t s) . St yl es of
cl ot hi ngr ef l ect and r ei nf or ce gener al
behavi our pat t er ns, such as mal e/ f emal e
and wor k/ l ei sur e di st i nct i ons ; and t he var i at i ons
wi t hi n t hi s cl ass
of obj ect s
al l owa host of di f f er ent i at i ons i n t he soci al or der t o be expr essed . The
i nf i ni t e
mani pul at i on of mat er i al s made possi bl e by i ndust r i al t echnol ogy per mi t s t hi s
soci et y t o devel op a f ar l ar ger set of di f f er ent i at i ng si gns t han was possi bl e
ear l i er . Yet however br oad or nar r owi t s r ange may be, t he wor l d of pr oduced
obj ect s al ways r epr esent s "man speaki ng t o man
t hr ough t he medi um
of
t hi ngs . " 36
I t i s st i l l f r ui t f ul t o f ol l owMar x' s l ead and t o vi ewt he under st andi ng of t he
commodi t y f or mas ( at t he ver y l east ) t he i ni t i al pr obl emf or our anal yt i cal
ef f or t s . However , I bel i eve we must pr oceed ont he assumpt i ont hat we do not
yet under st and i t . We must do mor e t han f eed newdat a i nt o t he ol d pr ogr am.
I n
my vi ewt he sour ces di scussed i n t hi s essay ( especi al l y Sci t ovsky, Hi r sch,
and Sahl i ns) put us on
t he
t hr eshol d of si gni f i cant newdepar t ur es f or t he
t heor y of advanced capi t al i st soci et y .
I n
what f ol l ows
I
have i ndi cat ed onl y t he
out l i nes of speci f i c
t opi cs
t hat coul d be pur sued ont he basi s of t he pr ecedi ng
di scussi on.
1 .

Rei f i cat i on andFal se Consci ousness

One of t he commonest f eat ur es of
human cul t ur es i s t he use of obj ect s t o mar k soci al di st i nct i ons among
per sons . Under many di f f er ent ki nds of ci r cumst ances t he at t r i but es
associ at ed wi t h t hose di st i nct i ons may be t r ansf er r ed t o t he obj ect s
t hemsel ves, whi ch t hen woul d come t o possess a degr ee of aut onomy vi s- d- vi s
human
agent s who had l ost cont r ol of t he symbol i c meani ngs vest ed i n t hem.
43
WILLIAMLEISS
Those
meani ngs, nowwi t ha " l i f eof t hei r own" ,
canact as acount er wei ght t o
t he spont aneous
devel opment of newer cul t ur al f or ms
ar i si ng i n r esponse t o
envi r onment al
and soci al changes.
If
some
t er mi nol ogi cal l i cense be
per mi t t ed,
r ei f i cat i on coul d be t er med a
" negat i veext er nal i t y" i n t hepr ocess
of
obj ect i f i cat i on, wher e by t he l at t er
weunder st and t he t r ansf or mat i on
of
nat ur e i nt o
physi cal f or ms t hat expr ess
human cr eat i vi t y .
Thei deol ogi es
of ear l y capi t al i sm, whi ch
r epr esent ed economi cr el at i ons as
t he out come of
t he wor ki ngs of uni ver sal l y- appl i cabl e
nat ur al l aws, wer e
r ei f i ed f or ms of
soci al consci ousness. Int hem
t her eal soci al t r ansf or mat i ons
whi chcr eat ed
t hose economi c r el at i ons ( suchas
t hef or ci ng of l abour - power
i nt o t he commodi t y
f or m) wer econceal ed and
di st or t ed; soci al pol i cy, i t was
sai d, had t o " obey"
t he l aws of t he mar ket pl ace
. However , t he gr adual
accept ance of i ncr easi ng
gover nment al mani pul at i on
of t he economy has
l ar gel y ( but not ent i r el y)
madet hi s f or mof r ei f i ed
consci ousness obsol et e. It i s
not cl ear whet her i t
has been r epl aced, on t he
l evel of over al l publ i c
under st andi ng of t he r el at i on
bet ween economy and publ i c
pol i cy, by some
ot her f or ms.
Thet heor y of f al se
needs i mpl i es t hat t he l ocus
of r ei f i ed under st andi nghas
shi f t ed i n a
sense f r omt he spher e of
pr oduct i on t o t hat of consumpt i on
. Thi s
t heor y
suggest s t hat t her ei s aper vasi ve
mani pul at i onof desi r eor
di st or t i on i n
t he
r el at i on bet ween needs and
t he obj ect s of sat i sf act i on.
Gi vent he cul t ur al
var i abi l i t y of needs,
however , i t has pr oved
di f f i cul t f or t he t heor y t o go
beyond t he vaguest
gener al i zat i ons
. 31
Unt i l i t
i s abl e t o do so i t wi l l not be
possi bl e
f or us t o eval uat e t he
cont ent i on; andunl ess i t does
so i t r uns t her i sk
of bei ng consi der ed
as mer el y an
i nvi di ous di st i nct i on. In gener al any
t heor y
of f al se
consci ousness shoul d be abl e
t o be cl ear er t han t hose i n t he past
have
been about
j ust what ki nds of
" myst i f i cat i on" occur as a r esul t of
capi t al i st
exchange
r el at i onshi ps.
2. Rei f i cat i on
and Commodi t y Fet i shi sm

In Mar xi st t hought
t he
f et i shi smof
commodi t i es i s by andl ar gea
speci al case of r ei f i cat i on.
What was
sai d
above of t he l at t er appl i es as
wel l t o t he f or mer . 38
Speci f i cal l y, i t i s
i mpl ausi bl e t o suggest t hat
per sons ar e " r ul ed" by
what ever meani ngs ar e
pr oj ect ed ont ot hewor l d
of commodi t i es. Rat her ,
t hose commodi t i es seemt o
be mor eand mor e
t he per f ect l y t r anspar ent
r eposi t or i es of t hose meani ngs
-
i . e. , t he sat i sf act i on
of needs t akes pl ace i n
t he cont ext of an open- ended
compet i t i ve
emul at i on, wher et he assor t ment
of bot hobj ect s and symbol s i s
const ant l y r eshuf f l ed.
It may be
possi bl e, however , t o
r e- i nt er pr et t hose concept s i n t hi s
new
cont ext . The r anked and
di scont i nuous spher es of exchange
abol i shed by
commodi t y
pr oduct i on may r e- appear
as qual i t at i vel y di st i nct
spher es of
meani ngwi t hi n t hecommodi t y f or m
i t sel f . ( Recal l Sal i sbur y' s
poi nt about t he
di mensi ons of subsi st ence,
l uxur y, and cer emony
or pr est i ge i n t he
THE
FETI SHI SM
OFOBJ ECTS
aut omobi l e. ) Thi s r equi r es car ef ul i nvest i gat i on t o see whet her a f r ui t f ul l i ne
of i nqui r y may be devel oped. One possi bl e i mpl i cat i on may be not ed. The
ef f ect i veness of t hepr est i ge economy i n pr i mi t i ve soci et i es seems t o dependi n
l ar ge par t on ( 1) i t s segr egat i on f r omnon- pr est i ge ( subsi st ence) pur sui t s and
( 2) t he speci f i cat i on of a cl osed set of count er s as pr est i ge t okens . Bot h
pr i nci pl es
ar e vi ol at ed i n t he pr est i ge
compet i t i ons i n
mar ket soci et y
. I f t he
compet i t i on i s mor e open- ended, t he si gns of success ar e al so l ess cl ear and
st abl e; t hus i t i s
bot h mor e ext ensi ve, encr oachi ng
on al l
aspect s of ever yday
l i f e, and
-
per haps -
l ess
sat i sf yi ng i n i t s out come, si ncet he
t okens
of mer i t
have no l ast i ng val ue. Pr est i ge t ooi s t hr eat ened by i nf l at i onar y pr essur es. The
di f f usi on of pr est i ge compet i t i on t hr oughout t he domai n of consumpt i on
may
pr ovi de
a basi s f or r e- i nt er pr et i ng t he concept of r ei f i cat i on i n t hecont ext of
t he commodi t y f or m. 3 9
3 .

Exchange i n Mar ket and Non- mar ket Cont ext s

Changes i n t hel ar ger
cont ext of mar ket r el at i ons and t hei r soci al f unct i ons have l ong been
advocat ed as par t of t he soci al i st opposi t i on t o capi t al i sm. Some of t he
ar gument s about t he di f f er ent st ages t hr ough whi ch soci al i st soci et i es ar e
supposed t o evol ve, or about t he di f f er ences bet ween soci al i sm and
communi sm, t ur n on t hi s poi nt . Yet i n Mar xi st t heor y at l east , accor di ng t o
St anl ey Moor e, t hese ar gument s have st i l l not been suf f i ci ent l y cl ar i f i ed.
4
o
Such i ssues as t he scope of commodi t y pr oduct i on, al t er nat i ve t ypes of
exchange r el at i onshi ps, and t het ypes of soci al di f f er ent i at i on r equi r ecl oser e-
exami nat i on i n soci al i st t heor y. The ent er pr i se wi l l be mor e pr oduct i ve i f ,
i nst ead of conf i ni ng i t sel f t o specul at i ve t r eat i ses, i t al so l ooks at t he
i nst r uct i ve
exper i ences wi t h t hese mat t er s t hat have occur r ed under t he st at e-
soci al i st r egi mes . 4 1
4 .

The Compar at i ve Per spect i ve: Concl udi ng Not es

The ant hr opol ogi cal
mat er i al s ar eespeci al l y i nt er est i ng ononepoi nt : t he l i nkages bet ween pr est i ge
and i t s mat er i al t okens ar e qui t e ar bi t r ar y. Thi s has some si gni f i cance f or our
own soci et y, wher e si mi l ar l i nkages i n r ecent t i mes r el y on goods and l i f est yl es
t hat pl ace heavy demands on
r esour ces
and ener gy. Thi s
has madei t
di f f i cul t
t o knowhowt o deal wi t ht he ser i ous i nequi t i es i n t hedi st r i but i on of i ncome,
si nce r ai si ng ot her s t o a hi gher st andar d woul d f ur t her i nt ensi f y t hose
demands . Adi f f er ent appr oach may br i ng a happi er sol ut i on t o t hi s di l emma.
I t i s possi bl e t hat r el at i vel y i nof f ensi ve ways may be f ound t o r e- i nt er pr et
pr est i ge
val ues i n t er ms of l ess r esour ce- ext r avagant goods. Gi ven t he
ar bi t r ar y char act er of such val ues, t her e i s no r eason t o suppose t hat t he
r esul t s wi l l be l ess f ai r or l ess sat i sf yi ng.
Envi r onment al St udi es &Pol i t i cal Sci ence
Yor k Uni ver si t y
4 5
WI LLI AMLEI SS
Not es
1 .

RaymondFi r t h, Pr i mi t i ve Pol ynesi anEconomy, 2nded. , London: Rout l edge, 1 965, p. 1 8 .
2.

Fi r t h, Pr i mi t i ve Pol ynesi an Economy, p. 36.
3.

I n t he l i t er at ur e on economi c ant hr opol ogy t her e i s a debat e over t he appl i cabi l i t y of
moder neconomi c cat egor i es ( capi t al i nvest ment , f or exampl e) t o
t he
anal ysi s
of pr i mi t i ve
soci et i es . The st r engt hs andweaknesses of t he di f f er ent posi t i ons ar e
not
r el evant t o
t he
pur pose of t hi s paper ; myor i ent at i on i s basedont he i nt er medi at e posi t i onchampi onedby
Fi r t h . See Raymond Fi r t h, ed. , Themes i n Economi c Ant hr opol ogy, London: Tavi st ock,
1 967.
4.

Mar shal l Sahl i ns, "Ont he Soci ol ogyof
Pr i mi t i ve Exchange", i nhi s St one Age Economi cs,
Chi cago: Al di ne, 1 972, p. 1 86.
5.

Ot her s ar e St ephen Kl i ne and Wi l l i amLei ss, "Adver t i si ng, Needs
and ' Commodi t y
Fet i shi sm"' , Canadi anJ our nal of Pol i t i cal andSoci al Theor y, Vol . 2; No. 1 , Wi nt er , 1 978,
pp. 5- 30; and Wi l l i am Lei ss, "Mar x and Macpher son: Needs, Ut i l i t i es and Sel f -
Devel opment ", ( f or t hcomi ng) .
6.

Mar shal l
Sahl i ns, Cul t ur e andPr act i cal Reason, Chi cago: Uni ver si t y of Chi cago Pr ess,
1 976, p. 21 1 .
7.

V. L. Leymor e, Hi dden Myt h: The St r uct ur e of Symbol i smi n Adver t i si ng, London:
Hei nemann, 1 975; J udi t h Wi l l i amson, Decodi ngAdver t i sement s, London: Mar i onBoyar s,
1 978 .
8
.

Thor st ei n Vebl en, The Theor yof t he Lei sur e Cl ass, NewYor k: Vanguar dPr ess, 1 926, p.
1 1 0.
9.

/ bi d. , pp. 25- 6, 31 , 32.
1 0.

/ bi d. , pp. 58, 1 57f f .
1 1 .

Thi s i s t he t hemeof TheEngi neer s andt he Pr i ce Syst em, aser i es of essays f i r st publ i shedi n
t he magazi ne The Di al i n 1 91 9, andi t canbef oundt hr oughout Vebl en' s t hought : seeJ oseph
Dor f man, Thor st ei n Vebl enandhi s Amer i ca, NewYor k: A. M. Kel l ey, 1 961 , passi m.
1 2.

See Dor f man, op. ci t . , p.
62.
One of Vebl en' s
sour ces was J . B. Cl ar k, The Phi l osophyof
Weal t h
( 1 885)
. For anear l i er exampl e see Rousseau' s r emar ks i n Roger Mast er s, ed. , The
Fi r st andSecondDi scour ses, NewYor k:
St
. Mar t i n' s Pr ess, 1 964, pp.
1 49, 1 56,
1 74- 5
. Cf.
C. B. Macpher son, "Needs and
Want s: anOnt ol ogi cal or Hi st or i cal Pr obl em?" i n Ross
Fi t zger al d, ed. , Human
Needs andPol i t i cs, London: Per gamonPr ess, 1 977, pp. 28- 9.
1 3.

And i ndeed St af f an Li nder ' s mar vel ous book, The Har r i edLei sur e Cl ass, NewYor k:
Col umbi aUni ver si t y Pr ess, 1 970.
1 4.

For oneexampl e see t he di scussi on of cer emoni al exchange among t he Ti kopi ai n Fi r t h,
Pr i mi t i ve Pol ynesi an Economy, pp. 320- 332.
1 5.

Raymond Fi r t h, Economi cs of t he New Zeal and Maor i , 2nd ed. , Wel l i ngt on, N. Z. :
Gover nment Pr i nt er , 1 959, p. 450; see al so p. 1 67.
1 6.

Fi r t h, Economi cs of t he NewZeal andMaor i , p. 41 .
46
THEFETISHISMOFOBJECTS
17 .

Cora DuBoi s, "The Weal thConcept as anIntegrati ve Factor i n Tol owa- Tututni Cul ture",
i n Essays i n Anthropol ogy presented to A. L. Kroeber, Berkel ey: Uni versi ty of Cal i f orni a
Press, 1936, pp. 49- 65, i s the earl i est pi ece I have f oundthat uses the subsi stence- presti ge
economy terms. In addi ti on to the exampl es gi ven bel ow, see: Paul Bohannan, Soci al
Anthropol ogy, NewYork: Hol t, Ri nehart and Wi nston, 1963, pp. 233- 240 ( Trobri and
Isl ands) ; Fi rth, Pri mi ti ve Pol ynesi an Economy, pp. 340- 344 ( Ti kopi a) ; and W. R. Bascom
"Soci al Status, Weal th and Indi vi dual Di f f erences among the Yoruba", Ameri can
Anthropol ogi st, vol . 55, 1951 .
18.

W. R.
Bascom, "Ponapean Presti ge Economy", Southwestern Journal of Anthropol ogy,
vol . 4, 1948,
pp. 211- 221
.
19
.

Bohannan, op. ci t
. , p.
254
.
20.

Bohannan, op. ci t . , pp. 248- 253
.
See especi al l y p. 252: "Ti v are scornf ul of a man who i s
merel y ri ch i n subsi stence goods ( or, today, i n money) . If , havi ng adequate subsi stence, he
does not seek presti ge i n accordancewi ththe ol d counters, or i f hedoes not stri ve f or more
wi ves, andhencemorechi l dren, the f aul t must be personal i nadequacy
.
They al so notethat
they al l
try to keep a manf rommaki ng conversi ons ; j eal ous ki nsmen of a ri ch man wi l l
bewi tchhi mand hi s peopl eby f eti shes, i n order to
make
hi mexpendhi s
weal thonsacri f i ces
to repai r the f eti shes, thus mai ntai ni ng economi c equal i ty
. . .
Theref ore, the man who
converts hi s weal thi nto hi gher categori es i s successf ul - he has a' strong heart' . Hei s both
f eared and respected. "
21 .

R. F. Sal i sbury, FromStonetoSteel , London: Cambri dge Uni versi ty Press, 1962, p. 103.
22.

Ibi d. , p. 212; cf. Mary Dougl as, "Pri mi ti ve Rati oni ng : AStudy i n Control l ed Exchange", i n
Fi rth, ed. , Themes i n Economi c Anthropol ogy, pp. 136- 138.
23.

Op. ci t . , p. 204.
24.

Oneexampl e of what
may be mi ssed wi th excessi vel y abstract categori es : Inmost pri mi ti ve
soci eti es the
ranked spheres of needs and exchanges are i ntri nsi cal l y rel ated to rol e
determi nati ons. Thus the presti ge economy i s al most enti rel y amal epreserve. Thi s i s hardl y
an i nconsequenti al f act f or the theory of human needs.
25.

Thus the "broad" meani ng of "f eti sh" of f ered by Webster' s col l egi ate di cti onary i s, "any
materi al
obj ect regarded wi thsupersti ti ous or extravagant trust or reverence. " It al so has a
techni cal
meani ng i n psychoanal yti c l i terature that i s wi del y known.
26.

I do not meanto i mpl y here that soci al rel ati ons i n
these
soci eti es
were a perf ect expressi on
of the proper i nterpl ay of i ndi vi dual and group, or that there were no regressi ve el ements
( the wi despread f eti shi sti c practi ces are suf f i ci ent evi dence to the contrary) . Acri ti que of
themonthei r own terms i s bothbeyond mycompetenceandbeyondthescopeof thi s paper.
27 .

Jean Baudri l l ard,
Le systeme des obj ets, Pari s: Gal l i mard, 1968, pp. 276f f ; the thesi s i s
el aborated i n Lasoci i i i deconsommati on, Pari s:
S. G. P . P . , 1970. Theexampl es i n the text
are mi ne.
28.

Thei r work i s presented anddi scussed i n a superb essay by Robert D' Ami co, "Desi reandthe
Commodi ty
Form", Tel os, no. 35, Spri ng, 1978. Thequotati onat the endof thi s paragraph
i s f rom
p. 101 .
29.

[ bi d. , p. 104. D' Ami coobj ect s t o Baudr i l l ar d' s r eadi ng of Mar x. I t hi nk
t her e i s mor e t r ut h
i n i t t han D' Ami coi s wi l l i ng t o concede, but i t i s cer t ai nl y cor r ect t osay t hat Baudr i l l ar d
i gnor es al l t he nuances i n Mar x' s t ext s. The most adequat e cr i t i que and i nt er pr et at i on of
Mar xon t hi s poi nt i s, i n my vi ew, t he one of f er edby Sahl i ns, Cul t ur e and Pr act i cal Reason,
pp. 148- 170.
30. I n hi s essay, "176t i chi sme et i d6ol ogi e" ( 1970) , r epr i nt ed i n hi s Pour une cr i t i que de
l Vconomi epol i t i que dusi gne, Par i s : Gal l i mar d, 1972, pp. 95- 113; al sot he chapt er "Au- del a
de l a val eur d' usage", i bi d. , pp.
154- 171 . Cf. Kl i ne
and
Lei ss, op. ci t . , pp.
9- 13.
31.

Pour une cr i t i que, p. 160 ( my i t al i cs) .
WI LLI AMLEI SS
32.

Mar x, Gr undr i sse, t r
. Mar t i n Ni col aus, London: Pengui n, 1973, p. 881, quot ed by Sahl i ns,
Cul t ur e and Pr act i cal Reason, p. 151 . Sahl i ns not es t her e t he cont r ast i ng passage f r ompp.
267- 268
of t he Gr undr i sse, wher e Mar x pr omi ses - but never subsequent l y f ul f i l l s t he
pr omi se - t o show how use val ue i s a "det er mi nant " of t he "syst emof needs and
pr oduct i on" .
33.

Sahl i ns, Cul t ur e and Pr act i cal Reason, pp. 207- 208.
34.

I bi d. , p. 169.
35.

W. D. Wel l s and A. D. Bear d, "Per sonal i t y and Consumer Behavi our ", i n S. War d and
T. S. Rober t son, eds. Consumer Behavi our : Theor et i cal Sour ces, Engl ewood Cl i f f s, N. J . :
Pr ent i ce- Hal l , 1973, pp. 141- 199. Tabl e 3 i n
t hei r ar t i cl e ( pp. 180- 189) l i st s a gr eat number of
t hese r esear ch ef f or t s .
36.

Cul t ur e and Pr act i cal Reason, p. 178.
37.

Ar ecent st at ement of f er s a good i l l ust r at i on: "Hence, t r ue needs ar e t hose whi ch f ost er t he
devel opment of human uni ver sal i t y, gi ven t he achi eved l evel of mat er i al and i nt el l ect ual
r esour ces ; f al se needs t hosewhi ch bl i ndl y r epr oduce t he i r r at i onal
necessi t y of domi nat i on. "
Char l es Rachl i s, "Mar cuse and t he Pr obl emof Happi ness", Canadi an J our nal of Pol i t i cal
and Soci al Theor y, Vol 2, No. 1, Wi nt er , 1978, p. 80.
38.

1 have benef i t ed f r omaconver sat i on wi t h Her ber t Mar cuse on
t hese mat t er s
.
I hast ent oadd
t hat t he f or mul at i ons i n t he t ext ar e ent i r el y my own r esponsi bi l i t y .
39.

I n hi s Democr at i c Theor v, NewYor k
: Oxf or d Uni ver si t y Pr ess, 1973, pp. 178- 9, C. B.
Macpher son accuses mar gi nal ut i l i t y t heor i st s of "maki ng t he assumpt i on of
uni ver sal i nnat e
emul at i on, or i nnat el y i nsat i abl e want s, " and
he suggest s t hat t hi s i s a r egr essi on t oa "pr e
Hobbesi an" posi t i on. I n pr i mi t i ve soci et i es t he pr opensi t y f or emul at i on i s gener al l y
r est r i ct ed t o adul t mal es ( t hus i s not uni ver sal ) and i s not r el at ed t o any i nsat i abi l i t y of
want s . I t i s cl ear l y a cul t ur al pr act i ce, and t hus not "i nnat e" i n t he st r i ct sense; one need not
assume i t i s pr esent i n al l human cul t ur es, but al soone cannot r egar d i t as si mpl y a
pr oduct
of capi t al i st mar ket r el at i ons
.
Whet her one
vi ews
i t s moder n
f or mas i nher ent l y har mf ul or
benef i ci al i s of cour se a mat t er of j udgement
; i n t hi s essay I have not t aken a st ance on t hat
i ssue, but mer el y cal l ed
at t ent i on t o i t s si gni f i cance i n an anal yt i cal sense.
40.

Thi s i s devel oped i n hi s f or t hcomi ng book, "An Obsur ed
Al t er nat i ve : Mar xon Soci al i sm
and Communi sm" . Pr of essor
Moor e ki ndl y al l owed me t o r ead hi s dr af t manuscr i pt .
41.

One val uabl e st udy i s Phi l i p Hanson, Adver t i si ng and Soci al i sm, Whi t e Pl ai ns, N. Y. :
I nt er nat i onal Ar t s and Sci ences Pr ess, 1974.
48
Canadi an J ournal of Pol i t i cal andSoci al Theory/ Revue canadi enne de
t hi ori e
pol i t i gueet soci al e, Vol . 2, No. 3 ( Fal l / Aut omne, 1978) .
THE
LEGACYOF POLI TI CALECONOMY:
THI NKI NGWI TH
ANDAGAI NSTCLAUS OFFE
J ohnKeane
Recent st at ement s byPi erreTrudeau
haveconfi rmedwhat manyof us have
l ong suspect ed: t heageof l i beral i smandi t s sensi t i vi t y
t oprobl ems of power i s
over
. I
Not wi t hst andi ng wi despread offi ci al chat t er
about "de- cont rol s" and
"cut backs" and t he renewed cal l for "free
market s", we of t he advanced
capi t al i st
worl d are wi t ness t o st at e act i vi t i es unparal l el ed
i n t hei r ext ent ,
sophi st i cat i on,
and i nt rusi veness i n t he market - pl ace. Marx' s
except i onal
comment s
ont he"huge st at eedi fi ce" of t he France of hi s
day- "a count ry
where every mousei s under pol i ce admi ni st rat i on"z -
becomeuni versal l y
appl i cabl e t o our t i mes .
I n l i ght
of t hesedevel opment s, t herecent ent husi ast i c
revi val of i nt erest i n
Marx' s di scussi on
of pol i t i cal economyandt hest at ei s l ong overdue.
Yet t hi s
renewal ( e. g. t he
Mi l i band- Poul ant zas confront at i on3) i s a t horoughl y
ambi guous, evenprecari ous devel opment .
Thi s i s becauset hepromi set hat i t s
real
i nsi ght s woul dcondemnt o obscuri t yt he
by- nowst al e pol i t i cal "cl assi cs"
of t he
Marxi st t radi t i on, 4 t ends t o go handi n hand
wi t hat t empt s at a more
general t heory of pol i t i cs
charact eri zed by a "ret reat " t o Marxi an
formul at i ons .
Al most i nvari abl y, t hi s t ext ual regressi oni s accompani ed
byl ament at i ons
about Marx' s
wel l - known fai l ure t o compl et e hi s
foreshadowed fourt h
vol ume( of amore
ext ensi ve, si x- part t reat i ses) ont hest at e. Si nce
Marx never
effect edt hi s comprehensi ve,
syst emat i c t heory of t hecapi t al i st st at e, i t i s
sai d
t hat t he
l at t er i s nowonl ypossi bl eont he
basi s of areconst ruct i onof vari ous
of hi s
pi eces deci rconst ance. For al l t hei r
i mport ant di sagreement s, t hi s i s t he
shared poi nt of
depart ure of Poul ant zas' earl y cl ai mt hat
Marx andEngel s
underst ood
Bonapart i sm as t he paradi gmat i c t ype of
capi t al i st st at e, b
Mi l i band' s deri vat i onof t het heory
of t he"rel at i ve aut onomy" of t hecapi t al i st
st at e from
awel l - knownMani fest o passage, ? and
Al t vat er' s "Kapi t al - l ogi k"
anal ysi s of "t he
separat i onof EconomyandPol i t i cs . " 8
Thi s "ret urn" t o Marx
4 9
J OHNKEANE
i s a pri me and t roubl i ng
exampl e wi t hi n cont emporary Marxi s mof what
Merl eau- Pont y has cal l ed "t hought i n ret reat . "9 Al l egat i ons
about t he need
f or an el aborat ed
t heory of t hes t at evi a a ret urnt o Marxares ympt omat i c
of a
s t rong t endency
wi t hi n t hi s Marxi s m: t o pret end t hat i t has al ready "f ound
out " about t heworl d
i n whi chi t l i ves ; t hat i t has di s covered t hi s worl d' s modus
operandi by "ret urni ng"
t o, anddef endi ngvi gorous l y, t he Marxi s t "root s " of
i t s concerns .
I n myvi ew,
t hi s dogmat i c ret reat i s boundt o undermi ne t heel aborat i onof
a cri t i cal ,
emanci pat i on- i ns pi red t heory of t hepres ent . Thi s i s becaus eMarx' s
mos t general
t hes es on t he modern s t at e and economy are cri t i cal
appropri at i ons of t he s ecret of
t he "l aws of mot i on" of a uni que ens embl e of
condi t i ons i n capi t al i s t moderni t y -
namel y, ni net eent h- cent ury l i beral
capi t al i s mandi t s s t ri ct , dual i s t i c s eparat i on
of t hereal ms of ci vi l s oci et y and
s t at e. 1 0 Wi t ht he expandedi mport ance of
s t at eact i vi t i es under t he condi t i ons
of advanced capi t al i s m, Marx' s
general i ns i ght s on pol i t i cal economy, t he
s t at e and cri s i s s t and i n need
of radi cal recons t ruct i on: t hey have l os t t hei r
obj ect and, hence, t he
medi umof t hei r pract i cal veri f i cat i on. That t he Marxi an
cri t i que of pol i t i cal
economy and t he s t at e has been out wi t t ed by empi ri cal
devel opment s whi ch i t hadnot ant i ci pat ed i s t hei ni t i al premi s e
of t heworkof
Cl aus Of f e: "As we can no l onger regard t he s ys t emof pol i t i cal aut hori t y
as
a
mere ref l ex or s ubs i di ary organi zat i on f or s ecuri ng s oci al i nt eres t s , we are
f orced t o abandon t he t radi t i onal approach, whi ch s ought t o recons t ruct t he
pol i t i cal
s ys t emandi t s f unct i ons f romt heel ement s of pol i t i cal economy. "' I I n
def ens e of Of f e (who merel y broaches t hi s poi nt ) t hi s argument needs t o be
workedt hrough t horoughl y, and Marx' s cri t i que of l i beral capi t al i s ml ocat ed
wi t hi n i t s proper cont ext . Agai ns t t he s educt i ve power of dogmat i c
"ret reat i s m"
(t o whi ch, as we s hal l s ee, Of f e s omet i mes s uccumbs ) , t he
f ol l owi ng argument s are pres ent ed
as a cont ri but i on t o t he s harpeni ng of
recent debat es on pol i t i cal economy and t he s t at e. They
are f ounded on t he
as s umpt i on
t hat t he de- mys t i f i cat i on of our pres ent neces s i t at es t he
cl ari f i cat i on
of our pas t ; t hat onl y t hereby can t hi s pas t beocme ours , no
l onger f orgot t en,
negat ed abs t ract l y, or embraced bl i ndl y.
OnLi beral Capi t al i s m
For Of f e, what was uni que about l i beral capi t al i s m
was t he ext ent t o whi ch
"f ree" market
rel at i ons became hegemoni c. The bourgeoi s i e s t ruggl ed t o
make reci procal exchange
rel at i ons bet ween pri vat e and al l egedl y
aut onomous commodi t y owners
bot h t he "paces et t i ng" s t ruct ural pri nci pl e
of
t hi s s oci et y andt he maj or s ourceof i t s l egi t i mat i on. Soci al bei ng, l anguage
and
cons ci ous nes s came t o bedef i ned andordered t hrough market
rel at i ons .
50
THELEGACYOF
POLITICALECONOMY
In t hi s
sense ( and her e Of f e' s ar gument i s pr ef i gur ed ni cel y
i n t he wor k of
Neumann, Kar l
Pol anyi and Wol i n 1 z ) l i ber al capi t al i smwas t he
cul mi nat i on
of a pr ocess
of soci al evol ut i on whi ch had seen a gr adual
di f f er ent i at i on and
"uncoupl i ng" of t he
spher e of economi c pr oduct i on and exchange
f r omt he
f or mal const r ai nt s of
ki nshi p and pol i t i cs . Mar ket capi t al i smsawbot h
t he
emer gence of a spher e
of pr oduct i ve r el at i ons, and a pat t er n of
i deol ogi cal
t hought and speech
( possessi ve i ndi vi dual i sm, t he achi evement
pr i nci pl e)
r oot ed di r ect l y
wi t hi n t hose r el at i ons and seeki ngt hei r
r epr oduct i on
.
1 3 Lat er
i n t hi s essay, t he
si gni f i cance of t he l at t er spher e of "symbol i c
i nt er act i on" wi l l
be expl or ed i n some
dept h. For now, i t shoul d not be f or got t en
t hat l i ber al
capi t al i sm' s
r el at i ons of pr oduct i on wer e at t he same t i me
symbol i c r el at i ons .
Symbol i c codes
or "si gn val ues" al r eady exi st ed wi t hi n t he
l ogi c of t he
pr oduct i on of
exchange and use val ues, r egul at i ng t he
accumul at i on pr ocess
by est abl i shi ng f or
i t s par t i ci pant s a meani ngf ul , al l egedl y
undi st or t ed
uni ver se of di scour se
.
Cer t ai nl y, economi c
l i ber al i smand pol i t i cal l i ber al i smwer e no
Si amese
t wi ns
. It i s unt r ue t o say t hat mar ket
soci et y andl ai ssez - f ai r e coi nci dedbef or e
t he
ni net eent h cent ur y . Locke, f or exampl e,
had st r essed t he pr i macy of t he
st at e' s
"f eder at i ve" ( i . e. f or ei gn pol i cy) and
t he monar ch' s "pr er ogat i ve"
power s
over l aw, whi l e Machi avel l i and
Hobbes hadunder st oodt hat t he ver y
char act er
of possessi ve mar ket r el at i ons
at f i r st pr esupposed ext ensi ve
hi er ar chi cal st at e r egul at i on t o war d
of f sever e unempl oyment and economi c
and
soci al di sor der . The f or ci bl e
cr eat i on of abst r act i ndi vi dual s coul d onl y
succeed
under t he aegi s of an abst r act ,
cent r al i z ed st at e. Thi s was pr eci sel y t he
out come
of t he absol ut e monar chi es ( e. g. t he
Tudor s andear l y St uar t s) , whi ch
pi l l aged t he chur ch, suppr essed
f or ei gn enemi es, and
dar ed t o est abl i sh
peacef ul
st abi l i t y .
1 4
Even so, by t he ear l y
ni net eent h cent ur y ( Engl and i s per haps
pr ot ot ypi cal 1 s)
t he
oper at i ons of gover nment
wer emor eand mor eseen t o be
di st ur ber s of t he
"har moni es economi ques . " The
act i vi t i es of t hi s "ni ght wat chman
st at e" ( as
Lasal l e
cal l ed i t ) wer e t o be r est r i ct ed t o t he
gener al secur i ngof ot her wi se
sel f -
r epr oduci ng
mar ket condi t i ons : t he
har nessi ng of t ax, banki ngand
busi ness
l aw t o t he
dynami c needs of t he pr ocess of
capi t al accumul at i on; t he
pr ot ect i on of bour geoi s
commer ce vi aci vi l l aw, pol i ce, and
t he admi ni st r at i on
of
j ust i ce. Fr omwi t hi n t he
r anks of ear l y ni net eent h- cent ur y
ut i l i t ar i ani sm
camet he
st r ongest j ust i f i cat i on f or t he
"weakest " st at e commensur at e
wi t h t he
cl ass
domi nat i on of ci vi l soci et y . It was
Bent ham' s convi ct i on, f or
exampl e,
t hat t he most
gener al end of l aws wer e but
f our i n number : "t o pr ovi de
subsi st ence; t o
pr oduce abundance; t o
f avour equal i t y ; t o
mai nt ai n
secur i t y .
"1 6
Pr oceedi ng f r omhi s t i me- bound
assumpt i ons t hat t he
gr eat
unwashed
mass of l abour er s woul d never
seek t o el evat e t hemsel ves
above
subsi st ence
l evel s except t hr ough f ear of
st ar vat i on, and t hat , f or t he
mor e
5 1
JOHNKEANE
wel l t o do, t he secur e hope of gai n was t he necessar y
andsuf f i ci ent st i mul us t o
maxi mumachi evement andpr oduct i vi t y, Bent hamdeduced
hi s one "supr eme
pr i nci pl e" of secur i t y of exi st i ng pr oper t y r el at i ons
t hr ough t he st at e. The goal
of equal i t y of weal t h was made t o yi el d t o t hat
of secur i t y of bot h exi st i ng
pr oper t y and t he r et ur ns onone' s l abour
: "I n consul t i ng t he gr and pr i nci pl e of
secur i t y what ought t he l egi sl at or t o decr ee
r espect i ng t he mass of pr oper t y
al r eady exi st i ng? . . . He ought t o mai nt ai n
t he di st r i but i on as i t i s act ual l y
est abl i shed . . . " 1 7 The mar ket pr oper t y and
symbol i c or der was t her eby
summoned t o shed i t s pol i t i cal ski n; l i ber al
capi t al i sm' s i nst i t ut i onal
f r amewor k
and i t s mode of l egi t i mat i on became
i mmedi at el y economi c and
onl y medi at el y pol i t i cal . Li t er al l y, soci al l i f e was
par t i t i oned: a net wor k of
r ei f i ed pol i t i cal i nst i t ut i ons ( "t he publ i que Swor d" as
Hobbes cal l ed i t ) was set
t he t ask of medi at i ng and def endi ng t he anar chy
of t he pr i vat e r eal m, i n
whi ch, f r eed f r omt he ol d "per ni ci ous r egul at i ons", i ndi vi dual s pur sued
t hei r
i nt er est s and exer ci sed t hei r nat ur al r i ght s of pr i vat e j udgement .
I t was under t hese de- pol i t i ci zed
condi t i ons t hat l abour and exchange
pr ocesses t ook on t hat "t wo- f ol d nat ur e" out l i ned
by Mar x: whi l e pr oduci ng
use val ues, l abour i ng act i vi t y al so cr eat ed exchange
val ues . Whi l e al l ocat i ng
commodi t i es vi a t he medi um
of money, t he exchange pr ocesses of t he mar ket
ser ved t he sel f - expansi on
of capi t al and i t s unspoken domi ni on over t hose
who
l abour ed. 1 8 Cl ass domi nat i on st r ove t o become si l ent and
anonymous .
Money began t o gover n and t al k. "I n pl ace of t he sl ave dr i ver ' s
l ash" not ed
Mar x, "we have t he over seer ' s book of penal t i es . "
1 9
Accor di ng t o Of f e, t he bour geoi s at t empt at
ef f ect i ng t hi s anonymous,
l egal i zed cl ass domi nat i on was possi bl e i nsof ar as t hat st at e ensur ed
t he
pr edomi nance of t he pr e- pol i t i cal i nt er est s of t he bour geoi s by
t aki ng on a
def ensi ve r ol e ( as out l i ned by Bent ham) ; t hat i s, t he st at e
guar ant eed t he sel f -
r epr oduct i on of st r i ct l y del i mi t ed spher es of ci vi l act i vi t y
beyond i t s aut hor i t y.
I ndeed, "t he bour geoi s st at e conf i r med i t s cl ass nat ur e
pr eci sel y t hr ough t he
mat er i al l i mi t s i t i mposed on i t s aut hor i t y. "z
Whi l e Of f e does not el abor at e t hi s poi nt , i t i s
i mpor t ant t o not e t hat t hi s i s
t he cont ext i n whi ch, i n hi s f amous 1 8 59 f or mul at i on,
Mar xspoke cor r ect l y of
t he bour geoi s- const i t ut i onal st at e as
"super st r uct ur al " . Thi s st at e was i ndeed
dependent upon t he "r eal f oundat i on" of
t hi s per i od, namel y, t hose r el at i ons
of pr oduct i on whi ch const i t ut ed
t he economi c st r uct ur es of l i ber al ,
bour geoi s
soci et y. z 1 Thi s f or mul at i on i s
r epeat ed ( al bei t qui t e unsyst emat i cal l y)
t hr ough
a wi de sel ect i on of Mar x' s t ext s .
Poul ant zas' ear l y cl ai mt hat Bonapar t i smi s
t hei r cent r al t heme i s but a
car el ess and unf ounded over - i nt er pr et at i on.
For
exampl e, t he 1 8 59 f or mul at i on i s al r eady
f or eshadowed i n- t he cr i t i que of
Hegel , accor di ng t o whose r at her cl assi cal
vi ewof pol i t i cs t he moder n st at e
was "t he r eal i t y of concr et e
l i ber t y", t he uni ver sal domai n of
enl i ght ened
convi vi al i t y wi t hi n whi ch
i ndi vi dual ci t i zens r eal i sed t hei r j udi ci al ,
mor al and
52
THELEGACYOFPOLI TI CALECONOMY
pol i t i cal f reedom.
2 2
Throught he ci vi l corporat i ons andt he st at e bureaucracy
t he cont radi ct ory, part i cul ari st i c el ement s of ci vi l soci et y were t o be brought
t o reconci l i at i on at t he hi ghest st age of obj ect i ve Spi ri t : t he f ormer were seen
t o
f unct i on
as
" f i l t ers"
t hrough
whi ch t he
bel l umomni umcont ra omnes of
ci vi l
soci et y woul d be organi zed and di rect ed t oward t he st at e; t he
bureaucracy, on t he ot her hand, was t o medi at e rat i onal l y bet ween t hese
pri vat e groups
.
Accordi ng
t o
Marx,
i t i s preci sel y
t hi s " t emperi ng"
and uni versal i st i c
medi at i on of pri vat e
i nt erest
whi chcoul d
not be real i sed. Hegel ' s concept i on
of t he modernst at ei s purel y abst ract - f ormal . Hegel ' s i nt ent i on
of overcomi ng
t he act ual separat i on of ci vi l soci et y andst at eact ual l y l eads t o t heconcept ual
re- af f i rmat i on
of t he dual i sm. Hegel i s accused of syncret i sm. Wi t hi n t he
Hegel i an
schema, t heact ual ant i nomyof st at eandci vi l soci et y - whi chMarx
t ook t o be a
key charact eri st i c of bourgeoi s
moderni t y' s at t empt at
est abl i shi ng non- pol i t i cal
" reservat i ons" of exchange
2 3
- was si mul t aneousl y
reveal ed and conceal ed: " Bureaucracy deni grat es t he corporat i on as mere
appearance, or rat her want s t o deni grat e i t , but i t want s t hi s appearance t o
exi st and bel i eve i n i t s own exi st ence. Thecorporat i on i s t he at t empt of ci vi l
soci et y t o become t he st at e; but bureaucracy i s t hest at e whi chi n act ual i t y has
become ci vi l soci et y. "
2 4
Agai nst Hegel , Marx
f urt her pursued t hi s t heme of t he subj ugat i on of t he
st at et o t hel ogi c andpower of
ci vi l
soci et y i n hi s st i ngi ng
cri t i que of Ruge. The
modern
bourgeoi s st at e was seen onceagai n t o be rest ri ct edt o mere" f ormal "
and " negat i ve" act i vi t i es preci sel y because i t s powers ceased where t he de-
pol i t i ci zed
hust l e and bust l e of market act i vi t y commenced. Thi s " sl avery" of
ci vi l soci et y
was, f or Marx, t he " nat ural f oundat i on" upon whi ch t hi s st at e
rest edandt o whi chi t hadt o react . Thi s st at e
was
l i t eral l y
hel dt oget her byci vi l
l i f e. 2 5 Thanks t o t he f act t hat t he bourgeoi si e was t he l eadi ng source of revenues
f rom t axat i on and l oans, t he l i beral - bourgeoi s st at e became, ( i n t he
f ormul at i on of The German I deol ogy) " not hi ng more t han t he f ormof
organi zat i on whi ch t he
bourgeoi s by necessi t y adopt s f or bot hi nt ernal and
ext ernal purposes as a mut ual guarant ee of t hei r propert y
and i nt erest s
. "
2 6
Thi s st at e became a mut ual i nsurance pact of t he bourgeoi si ebot hagai nst t he
prol et ari at and agai nst i t sel f , t hat i s, agai nst t he persi st ent anarchy of
i ndi vi dual capi t al i st i nt erest s . 2 1 As t he most f amous ( andi l l - i nt erpret ed) 1 84 8
f ormul at i on
hadi t , t hi s st at e was " but a commi t t ee f or managi ngt hecommon
af f ai rs of
t he whol e bourgeoi si e. " 2 8
Of course, Marxunderst oodt he " i deal - t ypi cal "
case
of
t hi s devel opment t o
be t he Ameri can. 2 9 On ot her occasi ons, he poi nt ed
t o aberrant cases ( e. g. t he
Bonapart i st st at e i n France, Bi smarck' s Germany, t he Asi at i c mode of
product i on) wherei n t he
rel at i vel y great er " i ndependence" of t hest at et o more
act i vel y organi ze t he rel at i ons of
product i on resul t ed f rom( a) uni que
5 3
JOHNKEANE
t er r i t or i al and cl i mat i c condi t i ons, r ei nf or ced by t he gener al absence of t he
pr i vat e owner shi p and cont r ol of l and; ( b) t he f act t hat f eudal r emnant s
cont i nued t o hi nder t he achi evement of bour geoi s hegemony; and( c) wher e no
one par t i cul ar cl ass ( or
cl ass
f r act i on) had at t ai ned domi nance over t he
ot her s . 30 The l at t er
case
i npar t i cul ar r emi nds us t hat , f or Mar x, t he success of
t he bour geoi s st r uggl e t o de- pol i t i ci ze mar ket r el at i ons was ext r emel y
t ent at i ve . Cer t ai nl y, t he emer gence of ci vi l soci et y per mi t t edanenor mous, but
unpl anned, devel opment of
t he pr oduct i ve f or ces, a devel opment gui ded onl y,
by t he acqui si t i ve,
i nst r ument al - ut i l i t ar i an act i ons of mar ket par t i ci pant s .
Ther ewi t h, l i ber al
capi t al i sm and i t s Manchest er i t e st at e became t he f i r st
mode of
pr oduct i on t o i nst i t ut i onal i ze near sel f - sust ai ni ng capi t al
accumul at i on. However , as i s wel l - known, t he bour geoi s dr eamof opaque,
non- pol i t i cal ,
uni ver sal l y- accept abl e cl ass domi nat i on r esul t ed i n i t s
shat t er i ng opposi t e : pr ol et ar i an st r uggl e agai nst t he f or mandcont ent of t hi s
soci et y. Li ber al capi t al i sm( whose ext r eme f r agi l i t y f l owed f r omt he f act t hat
i t s pol i t i cal - economi c st r uct ur es and domi nant pat t er ns of t hought and
speech wer e l i nked i somor phi cal l y)
was
r ocked t o i t s ver y f oundat i ons by
cr i si s t endenci es whi ch wer e t ot al i nt hei r i mpact . Ver y f ewsoci al f or mat i ons
have ever l abour edunder
such per manent andt hor ough f ear andexci t ement
about t he possi bi l i t y of r evol ut i onar y change. Economi c cr i ses wer e
si mul t aneousl ysoci al cr i ses . Theyr eveal ed at event he mundane l evel of dai l y
l i f e t he cont r adi ct or y, i r r at i onal char act er of l i f e under l i ber al capi t al i sm: t he
"per sonal " was i mmedi at el y andundeni abl y "pol i t i cal " . Suchcr i ses, "byt hei r
per i odi cal r et ur n put on i t s t r i al , each t i me mor e t hr eat eni ngl y, t he exi st ence
of t he ent i r e bour geoi s soci et y. "
31
Thi s was f aci l i t at ed by t he f act t hat t he
char act er i st i c mar ket
i deol ogy ( possessi ve i ndi vi dual i sm) per t ai ned
t o ear t hl y
r el at i onshi ps of
human subj ect i vi t y: at t he same t i me, t hi s i deol ogy
r eveal ed
andconceal ed t he
possi bi l i t y of humansubj ect s sel f - consci ousl y
maki ng t hei r
soci al wor l d. As i deol ogy, possessi ve i ndi vi dual i smcoul d l ay cl ai mt o bei ng
t he f i r st i deol ogy, and l i ber al
capi t al i smt he f i r st soci al
f or mat i on wi t hi n whi ch
uni ver sal emanci pat i on f r omi deol ogi cal domi nat i on was possi bl e .
As Of f e poi nt s out , t hi s i s t he cont ext wi t hi n whi ch Mar x' s enqui r yi nt o t he
ni net eent h cent ur y val ue- f or mwas bot h cr edi bl e andf r ui t f ul . The cr i t i que of
capi t al i st domi nat i onat
bot h t he i nst i t ut i onal and
symbol i c- i deol ogi cal l evel s
- "t he anat omy of ci vi l soci et y" - coul d come i n t he f or mof a cr i t i que of
pol i t i cal economy onl y under condi t i ons wher e, as Mar xst r essed, "t he whol e
of humanser vi t ude i s i nvol vedi nt he r el at i onof wor ker t o pr oduct i on. "32
Thi s
i s al so why, wi t hi n Mar x' s schema, t he cat egor y of need- sat i sf yi ng,
ont ogenet i c l abour was cent r a1. 33 For Mar x, t he descr i pt i on of men and
women as bei ngs who st r uggl e wi t h and agai nst nat ur e and, t her eby,
t hemsel ves, was l i nked cl osel y wi t h t he t heor y of modes of pr oduct i on
successi vel y t r ansf or med t hr ough cl ass st r uggl e . Mor eover , t hr ough t he
54
THELEGACYOFPOLI TI CALECONOMY
i nsi ght t hat t he
val ue of t hi ng- l i ke commodi t i es was
dependent upon t he
l abour i ncor por at ed
i n t hem, t hr ough t he t heor y of sur pl us
val ue, and
t hr ough t he t heor ems of per i odi cal
cr i ses, Mar x demonst r at ed,
cont r ar y t o
bour geoi s i deol ogy, t hat t he
bour geoi s accumul at i on pr ocess
woul dcomet o a
st andst i l l over and over agai n.
These " i ndust r i al ear t hquakes"
wer e
under st ood as t he r eal bases of t he
hope f or r evol ut i on. The st al l ed,
boom-
bust char act er of l i ber al
capi t al i smwas a ki nd of vi sual demonst r at i on
t o t he
t oi l i ng masses, unl ess somet hi ng gave,
of t he di spar i t y bet ween t he devel oped
pr oduct i ve f or ces and t he
cl ass- f et t er ed r el at i ons of mat er i al
and symbol i c
pr oduct i on wi t hi n whi ch
t hese f or ces wer e " embedded"
. 34
Lat e
Capi t al i sm: St at e I nt er vent i on
as Cr i si s- Management
Of cour se,
somet hi ngs di d gi ve byt he l ast quar t er
of t he ni net eent h cent ur y.
Of f e ment i ons t he de- subl i mat i on of
t he pr oduct i ve f or ces vi a t he gr owi ng
nat i onal and t r ans- nat i onal
r at i onal i zat i on of wages, commodi t y
pr i ces,
t asks, and pr of i t s . 35 Fur t her ( and
most si gni f i cant l y, f or our pur poses)
st at e
i nt er vent i on
agai nst t he mar ket ar ound and af t er
Wor l d War I has been
cr uci al , i nsof ar
as i t has come t o si gnal t he
di ssol ut i on of t he non- pol i t i cal ,
l i ber al phase of capi t al i sm
and i t s soci al l y di si nt egr at i ve t endenci es . To
be
sur e, t he quant i t at i ve gr owt h of st at e act i vi t y i n t hi s
per i od has been
i mpr essi ve -
f or exampl e, i n Br i t ai n, I t al y, t he Uni t ed St at es,
Fr ance and
West Ger many st at e expendi t ur es
nowappr oach or exceed 40%of t he val ue of
gr oss domest i c pr oduct .
36
Mor e i mpor t ant l y,
however , t hi s st at e gr owt h
const i t ut es a qual i t at i ve expansi on compar ed wi t h i t s f or mer
r ol e. Whet her
usher ed
i n t hr ough par l i ament ar y appeal s ( as i n t he Uni t ed
St at es, Br i t ai n,
Canada,
Aust r al i a) or aut hor i t ar i an f asci sm( as i n I t al y andNazi
Ger many) ,
t hi s qual i t at i ve gr owt h
has become a uni ver sal and appar ent l y i r r esi st i bl e
t r end wi t hi n t he capi t al i st wor l d
of t he past f i ve decades . I t s qual i t at i ve
moment i s r eveal ed by i t s cr i t i cs, whot al k of
" cr eepi ng soci al i sm" . Such st at e
i nt er vent i on
i s not soci al i sm, but cr eepi ng i t has been.
That r eal mof l i f e i n
whi ch Mar xi an
cat egor i es hadmovedwi t h a gr eat deal of cr edi bi l i t y, t hat r eal m
whi ch consi st ed i n " pr i vat e men i n
t he exer ci se of sever al Tr ades andCal l i ngs"
( Hobbes) , begi ns t o shr i vel .
Agai nst t he l at e ni net eent h cent ur y backdr op
of economi c car t el i zat i on,
l abour and
t ar i f f di sput es, t her e wer e a number of cr uci al
devel opment s i n t he
pol i t i cal r eal m.
Har bi nger s of t he " ci vi l i sat i on" of t he st at e
and t he
" pol i t i ci zat i on" of ci vi l
soci et y, t hese i ncl uded t he gr adual af f i l i at i on
of
pol i t i cal par t i es wi t h par t i cul ar economi c
i nt er est gr oups, t he emer gence of
" par t y machi nes" bent on
engi neer i ng popul ar consent , and t he massi ve
economi c mobi l i zat i on of Wor l d
War I . Thi s st at e i nt er vent i on coi nci dedwi t h
5 5
J OHNKEANE
( a ) t he er osi on of t he "unwi el dy" pa r l i a ment a r y f or um, a s t he l ocus of
ba r ga i ni ng moved t o unof f i ci a l pa r t y or coa l i t i on ca ucuses,
a nd t o
newl y-
est a bl i shed gover nment . mi ni st r i es ( e. g. t he Wei ma r
Republ i c' s I nt er pa r t y
Commi t t ee a nd Mi ni st r y of La bour ; t he I t a l i a n Fa sci st Gr a nd Counci l a nd
Mi ni st r y of Cor por a t i ons) whi ch dea l t di r ect l y wi t h sect or s of l a bour a nd
ca pi t a l ; ( b) t he begi nni ngs of a t t empt s a t "a ccr edi t i ng" or ga ni zed
l a bour , by seeki ng i t s i nt egr a t i on wi t hi n a st a t e- super vi sed
ba r ga i ni ngsyst em
( by t he mi d- 1930' s, f or exa mpl e, t he Ma t i gnon a gr eement s a nd
t he Wa gner
Act ha d i mposed such r equi r ement s on Fr ench a nd
Amer i ca n ent r epr eneur s
si mi l a r t o t he a l r ea dy exi st i ngSt i nnes- Legi en a nd
Pa l ozzo Vi doni a gr eement s
i n Ger ma ny a nd I t a l y) ; a nd
( c)
t he
dr a ma t i c gr owt h of newst a t e f unct i ons,
such a s a t t empt s a t a l l oca t i ng r a wma t er i a l s a nd
pl a nni ng a nd r egul a t i ngt he
movement s of l a bour a nd commodi t y pr i ces .
Rescui ng l i ber a l ca pi t a l i smf r omcr i ses beca me possi bl e onl y
t hr ough i t s r e-
ca st i ng i n a "cor por a t i st " di r ect i on, di ssol vi ng t he ol ddua l i smof t he st a t e
a nd
i t s cyber net i c ma r ket . Mor e a nd mor e, t he st a t e ca me t o negot i a t e wi t h
f r a ct i ons of ca pi t a l a nd or ga ni zed l a bour ( or , sa nct i oned pseudo- uni ons, a s
i n
I t a l y) , t her eby bui l di ng t hemi nt o i t s st r uct ur es . 37 These devel opment s wer e
r ecogni zed
ea r l y
i n t he
pi oneer i ng wor k of Hi l f er di ng on "or ga ni zed
ca pi t a l i sm", i n t he wr i t i ngs of Kor sch,
Hor khei mer a nd Ma r cuse, a nd wer e
a nnounced pr ophet i ca l l y i n t he wor ds
of per ha ps t he most i nsi ght f ul f i gur e i n
t hi s ci r cl e, Fr eder i ck Pol l ock
: "Wha t i s comi ngt o a nendi s not ca pi t a l i sm, but
i t s
l i ber a l
.
pha se. " 38
Of f e pur sues t hi s t heme: t he st a t e i n l a t e ca pi t a l i smha s become
i nt er woven
wi t h
t he a ccumul a t i on pr ocess such t ha t t he l a t t er becomes a f unct i on
of
bur ea ucr a t i c st a t e a ct i vi t y a nd or ga ni zed pol i t i ca l
conf l i ct . No l onger a r e t hey
a s super - st r uct ur e t o ba se.
Ra t her , ca pi t a l i st r el a t i ons of pr oduct i on ha ve
been
r e- pol i t i ci zed
.
The ( pot ent i a l ) a nt a goni sm bet ween soci a l i zed
pr oduct i on a nd pa r t i cul a r ends ha s r e- a ssumed a di r ect l y pol i t i ca l
f or m. The
r ea l i sa t i on of pr i va t e ca pi t a l a ccumul a t i on ( or , t o i nvoke
Of f e' s f a vour i t e
expr essi on, "t he uni ver sa l i za t i on of t he
commodi t y f or m") i s nowpossi bl e
onl y on t he ba si s of a n a l l - encompa ssi ng pol i t i ca l medi a t i on
:
I n a n er a of compr ehensi ve st a t e i nt er vent i on, one ca n no
l onger r ea sona bl y spea k of `spher es f r ee of st a t e
i nt er f er ence' t ha t const i t ut e t he `ma t er i a l ba se' of t he
`pol i t i ca l
super st r uct ur e' ; a n a l l - per va si ve st a t e r egul a -
t i on of soci a l
a ndeconomi c pr ocesses i s cer t a i nl y a bet t er
descr i pt i on of t oda y' s or der . 39
El sewher e, Of f e devel ops t hi s a r gument vi a t he a na l yt i ca l di st i nct i on bet ween
56
THELEGACYOF
POLITICALECONOMY
" al l ocat i ve" and " pr oduct i ve" st at e pol i ci es . 40 Wher eas i n t he er a of l i ber al
capi t al i smst at e act i vi t i es wer e gener al l y r est r i ct ed t o
al l ocat i ve
f unct i ons,
i n
l at e capi t al i sm not onl y ar e t hese cont i nued but
t he st at e nowact ual l y
pr oduces condi t i ons whi char e essent i al f or t he
r epr oduct i onof pr i vat e capi t al
but whi ch t hi s capi t al i s i ncapabl e
of cr eat i ng. These i ncl ude key
i nf r ast r uct ur al
component s
such
as
heal t h, housi ng, educat i on, t r anspor t at i on
and communi cat i on ser vi ces, ener gy, manpower t r ai ni ng, and sci ent i f i c
r esear ch
and
devel opment .
Unl i ke t he l ess pr eci se concept of " st at e
i nt er vent i on" , t hi s i mpor t ant
di st i nct i on i s based not onl y on t he ext ent of st at e act i vi t y r equi r ed t o
r epr oduce t he accumul at i onpr ocess, but al so onanempi r i cal descr i pt i on of
t he nat ur e of t hese r equi r ement s and t he means by whi ch t he st at e f ul f i l l s
t hem. Al l ocat i ve pol i ci es i ncl ude t hose st at e at t empt s t o mai nt ai n condi t i ons
f or pr of i t abl e capi t al i st accumul at i on t hr ought he al l ocat i on of r esour ces of
" st at e pr oper t y" ( f or ces of " l awand or der " , t axes, t ar i f f s, cr ownl and andsea,
et c . ) whi ch
al r eady
ar e under i t s j ur i sdi ct i on. Usual l y, such r esour ces ar e
di st r i but ed accor di ng t o power st r uggl es wi t hi n and wi t hout t he st at e i t sel f .
" Al l ocat i on i s a mode of act i vi t y of t he capi t al i st st at e t hat cr eat es and
mai nt ai ns t he condi t i ons of accumul at i on i n a pur el y aut hor i t at i ve way.
Resour ces and power s t hat i nt r i nsi cal l y bel ong t o t he st at e and ar e at t he
di sposal of t he st at e ar e al l ocat ed. "
4 i
For exampl e, cer t ai n i ndust r i es ar e
" bai l ed out " , and ot her s r ecei ve pr ot ect i ve t ar i f f s ; monet ar y pol i cy i s
det er mi ned accor di ng t o cer t ai n st at e r ul es ; t r act s of l and ar e gi ven over t o
r ai l ways ; t he pol i ce, cour t s and mi l i t ar y ar e despat chedaccor di ng t o cer t ai n
l egal gui del i nes ; and so on.
Per haps t he cl ear est exampl e of such al l ocat i ve
pol i ci es i s t he var i ous
( Keynesi an) t echni ques of " i ndi cat i ve pl anni ng" devel oped dur i ng t he post -
war r econst r uct i on ef f or t i n Fr ance. 42 Whi l e st eady i nf l at i on, l abour unr est
and i nt er nat i onal t r ade compet i t i on have sl owed r ecent r at es of gr owt h, t hi s
i ndi cat i ve pl anni ng pl ayed a maj or r ol e i n r ej uvenat i ng t he Fr ench
accumul at i on pr ocess i n t he 1940' s and 1950' s . Pr emi sedupont he Keynesi an
t hesi s t hat f i r ms' deci si ons t o i nvest ( and, t her ef or e, busi ness f l uct uat i ons)
depend di r ect l y upon t he degr ee of cer t ai nt y about t he f ut ur e, t he
Commi ssar i at du Pl an has consi st ent l y sought t o r emove t he el ement of
unpr edi ct abi l i t y i n
domest i c demand
and i nvest ment . The pl an pl ot s t ar get s
f or each basi c i ndust r i al sect or , est i mat es t he pat t er ns of demand t o be
expect ed by i ndi vi dual pr oducer s, and speci f i es t he l i kel i hood of suppl i es
r eadi l y bei ng avai l abl e t o t hose pr oducer s . It has hel ped over come
" bot t l enecks" and sl uggi sh r at es of i nvest ment i n st r at egi c sect or s of t he
economy, and, mor e r ecent l y, has been i nst r ument al i n pr omot i ng " nat i onal
champi ons" i nt he
domai ns of
domest i c andi nt er nat i onal t r ade . Of f e' s poi nt i s
t hat t hese al l ocat i ve t echni ques, f or ms of whi ch wer e al so common i n t he
57
J OHNKEANE
ni net eent h cent ur y, ar e now or t hodoxy
i n
al l
l at e capi t al i st
count r i es
.
On t he ot her hand, t he novel t y of pr oduct i ve pol i ci es i s t hat t hey seek t he
pr ovi si on of "i nput s" of accumul at i on ( e. g . r econst r uct i ng l abour ski l l s vi a
pr ogr ammes of vocat i onal t r ai ni ng) i n ant i ci pat i on of di st ur bances wi t hi nt he
domai n of "pr i vat el y" cont r ol l ed accumul at i on. Thus, pr oduct i ve pol i ci es
st r i ve t obol st er saggi ng suppl i es of bot h var i abl e andconst ant capi t al , wher e
such capi t al i s ei t her not pr ovi ded, or pr ovi ded i n i nadequat e suppl y by
pr i vat e mar ket deci si ons .
4 3
Pr oduct i ve st at e pol i ci es ar e, t her ef or e, cr i si s-
avoi dance st r at egi es, t hr ough whi cht he st at e r esponds t oact ual or per cei ved
bl ockages wi t hi n t he accumul at i on pr ocess . Thei r r at i onal e, whi ch has r eal
mar ket - shear i ng ef f ect s, i s "t o r est or e accumul at i on or t o avoi d or el i mi nat e
per cei ved t hr eat s t o accumul at i on. "
4 4
Thi s i s t he r eal si gni f i cance anduni queness of "publ i c pol i cy" f or mat i on i n
t he per i od of l at e capi t al i sm. Thr ough such pol i ci es, t he st at e sel f consci ousl y
shoul der s t he t ask of over comi ng t he soci al l y di si nt egr at i ve consequences of
l i ber al capi t al i sm' s anar chi c pur sui t of pr of i t . By nomeans ar e t hese pol i ci es
"unpr oduct i ve"
. 4 s
Acr uci al case i n poi nt ( mer el y ment i oned by Of f e) i s
gover nment st r at egy whi chseeks t o up- gr ade t he "i mmat er i al i nf r ast r uct ur e"
vi a t he f or mal pr ovi si on of school i ng and r e- school i ng and, t her eby, t he
out put of t hose whomHaber mas has cal l ed "r ef l ect i ve wor ker s" . 4 6 Such
r ef l ect i ve, or second- or der , l abour power ( e. g. , t hat of i ndust r i al chemi st s,
engi neer s, t eacher s) can be seen as l abour appl i ed t o i t sel f , i t s pur pose
( exempl i f i ed
i n t he ol i gopol y sect or ) i s
t o
enhance
t he pr oduct i vi t y
of di r ect ,
f i r st - or der l abour . Thi s pl anned pr oduct i on of
r ef l ect i ve
wor ker s i s uni que t o
l at e capi t al i sm,
and poi nt s t o
t he obsol escence of Mar x' s assumpt i on ( i n
t he
f amous f al l i ng r at e of pr of i t t hesi s
st i l l
def ended by Poul ant zas and ot her s)
t hat t he r at e of sur pl us val ue t ends t o const ancy.
Thi s mar ket - r epl aci ng, pr oduct i ve st at e act i vi t y i s onl y one exampl e of t he
st at e' s mor e gener al i nvol vement i n t he pl anned pr ovi si on of sci ent i f i c and
t echnol ogi cal suppor t f or t he accumul at i onpr ocess . The"sci ent i zat i on" of t he
capi t al i st accumul at i on pr ocess dat es f r omt he l ast quar t er of t he ni net eent h
cent ur y. Dur i ng Mar x' s t i me sci ence
and
t echnol ogi cal devel opment
wer e
not
yet i ndust r i al i zed. Now, however , sci ence i s a l eadi ng pr oduct i ve f or ce,
f i nanced di r ect l y t hr ough st at e- f unded r esear ch anddevel opment pr oj ect s f or
t he mi l i t ar y sect or . The consequences of t hi s "st at i zat i on" and
"i ndust r i al i zat i on"
of sci ence andt echnol ogy have been st agger i ng
.
Not
onl y
does i t hel p t o r emove t he dest r uct i ve uncer t ai nt y f r omt he pat t er ns of
t echni cal i nnovat i on i n t he ol i gopol y sect or , i t al sor ender s di r ect l abour mor e
pr oduct i ve, andcheapens t he f i xed component s of capi t al , t her eby t endi ng t o
r ai se t he
r at e of sur pl us val ue. Thi s has
had
di r ect l y
pol i t i cal
consequences,
especi al l y si nce t her e emer ges a syst emi c abi l i t y t o pay hi gher wages t o
or gani zed l abour wi t hi n t he ol i gopol y sect or . Of f e i s cor r ect : such f or ms of
58
THELEGACYOFPOLITICALECONOMY
st at e cr i si s- avoi dance
st r at egy cannot be di smi ssed as unpr oduct i ve.
Towar d a Cr i t i que of t he Cr i t i que of
Pol i t i cal Economy
Wi t h t hi s ar gument , Of f e' s r eal
pr oj ect i s br oached . Inasmuch as t r adi t i onal
mar ket f or ces have been di spl aced and
r e- pol i t i ci zed, and t he st at e ci vi l i sed or
dr awn di r ect l y i nt o pr oduct i on,
di st r i but i on and consumpt i on, Of f e i s
adamant t hat a cr i t i cal t heor y of l at e capi t al i sm
can no l onger r et r eat t o, and
hi de under , t he aegi s of t he cr i t i que
of pol i t i cal economy i n i t s cl assi cal
Mar xi an f or mul at i on. At t empt s t o r et r eat t o cl assi cal
Mar xi smr i sk becomi ng
i deol ogi cal ,
i nsof ar as t hey concept ual l y exor ci ze t he
si gni f i cance of t he
par t i al
over comi ng of t he l awof val ue wi t hi n what
r emai ns of "t he economy" .
Mor e t han t hat , t hey
obf uscat e t he whol e pr obl emat i que of t he
or gani zat i on
of pol i t i cal
power and aut hor i t y and i t s r enewed
i mpor t ance i n t he
r epr oduct i on of domi nat i on i n t he t went i et h
cent ur y . 4 7 Hi st or i cal mat er i al i sm
has no choi ce but t o engage i n sel f - cr i t i ci sm
; t he Mar xi st cr i t i que of pol i t i cal
economy must be appl i ed t o i t sel f .
Of f e but t r esses t hi s i conocl ast i c
ar gument by poi nt i ng t o t hr ee i mmedi at e
consequences of t he al t er at i on of
bot h moment s of t he f or mer st at e- ci vi l
soci et y dual i sm: t he wi t her i ng
of cl ass st r uggl e, t he emer gence of
mar gi nal i zat i on, and t he expansi on of
t echnocr at i c pol i t i cs . Accor di ng t o
Of f e, t he pat t er ns whi ch mar ked mi l i t ant
cl ass st r uggl e unt i l t he mi d- 1930' s,
have si nce been di sf i gur ed. In par t t hi s
can
be
at t r i but ed t o newf or ms of wage
det er mi nat i on wi t hi n t he ar ena of
t he r at i onal i zed, t echnol ogi cal l y
i nnovat i ve, "pr i ce maki ng" nat i onal
and t r ans- nat i onal cor por at i ons . In t hi s
sect or , uni on- f i l t er ed demands
f or a gr eat er shar e of sur pl us can be gr ant ed
and "passed on" i n t he
f or mof hi gher pr oduct pr i ces t o an ext ent consonant
wi t h
t he degr ee of i ndi vi dual f i r ms' mar ket power . That -
i s, t he gener al l evel of
admi ni st er ed pr i ces i n money t er ms i s
pr i mar i l y adj ust ed by t he negot i at ed
l evel of money wage r at es, and
not by "mar ket f or ces" : "The mar ket
r el at i onshi p has become
vi r t ual r at her t han r eal t o t he owner of l abour
power . "
4 8
The pr i ce of
l abour i s negot i at ed pol i t i cal l y ; t he syst emof "pol i t i cal
wages" ( as
Hi l f er di ng had f i r st obser ved4 9) t ends di r ect l y t o pr omot e cl ass
negot i at i on and
pl anned compr omi se. St r uct ur es of wage det er mi nat i on
become
t he net s i nt o whi ch or gani zed l abour i s dr awn. Resul t ant pr obl ems of
t he "i nf l at i on bar r i er " not wi t hst andi ng ( Of f e has not hi ng t o say
on t hi s) , cl ass
conf l i ct t ends t o be ext er nal i zed, t r ansf i gur ed
i nt o company- uni on
negot i at i ons . s
o
Thi s devel opment i s r ei nf or ced by t he f act t hat l evel s of di sposabl e i ncome
have come t o be l ess
di r ect l y dependent upon t he mar ket ,
and mor e a f unct i on
of a whol e gamut of
st at e pol i ci es ( soci al ser vi ce
payment s, t he l ess t han
59
J OHNKEANE
adequat e pr ovi si on of heal t h
and housi ng, admi ni st r at i on of
mi ni mumwage
r at es and i ncomes
pol i ci es, et c. ) . 5 1 I n par t i cul ar ,
Of f e ar gues t hat t he st at e
appar at us di scr i mi nat es
sel ect i vel y i n f avour of ( and
i s, i n t ur n, t her ef or e
dependent upon)
t hosegr oups -pr i nci pal l y, or gani zed
l abour andol i gopol y
capi t al -
whosemut ual compl i ance i s cr uci al f or t he
smoot hr epr oduct i on of
t he syst em.
Upon t hese gr oups ( and especi al l y
f r act i ons of capi t al ) ar e
conf er r ed what
Of f e cal l s " st r uct ur al l y det er mi ned
pr i vi l eges" . 5 2 Wi t h t hi s
ar gument Of f e
t r anscends t he " cl ass-power " ver sus
" st at e power " pr obl em
expr essed so wel l
by Poul ant zas . 5 3 For Of f e, t hel at e capi t al i st
st at e i s caught
bet ween i t s r ol e
as apassi ve i nst r ument of
" cl ass"
f or ces
andi t s ot her r ol eas an
aut onomous
subj ect , r at i onal l y or gani zi ng and r e-or gani zi ng
amul t i pl i ci t y of
compet i ng i nt er est gr oups
. 5 4
These r ol es have
been ar t i cul at ed r espect i vel y by
t hose whomOf f e cal l s " i nf l uence and
const r ai nt " t heor i st s, and by t he
pl ur al i st s, soci al democr at s, and ot her s hol di ng
an " i nt egr at i on" model .
Because t he success of t he st at e' s
al l ocat i ve and pr oduct i ve pol i ci es and i t s
gener al budget ar y obl i gat i ons ar e
ul t i mat el y dependent on r evenues
gener at ed wi t hi n
t he economy, t he st at e must at t he same t i me bot h r eact t o
t he i mper at i ve of t he pr i vat e accumul at i on pr ocess ( a " capi t al i st st at e" ) and
i nt er vene sel ect i vel y t her ei n ( a " st at e i n capi t al i st
soci et y" )
. 5 5
One i mpor t ant
consequence of t hi s gener al pol i t i ci zat i on
of t he
accumul at i on pr ocess
i s t he ( at l east t empor ar y) di ssol ut i on
of t he obj ect i ve
gr ounds f or t he t hesi s of " t he
t wo gr eat host i l e camps" st i l l
empl oyed by some
sect i ons of t he pol i t i cal l y i nef f ect i ve
l ef t . Wi t hi n l at e capi t al i st count r i es,
t her e
i s at endency f or ver t i cal l y-opposed
" col l ect i vi t i es" ( i . e. cl asses) t o ber epl aced
by a " hor i zont al " syst emof
di spar i t i es bet ween vi t al ar eas. " 5 6 Thi s
i s Of f e' s
per suasi ve ar gument
agai nst t hose who woul d unt hi nki ngl y
ut i l i ze t he
anal yt i c cat egor i es
of " Labour " , " Capi t al " , and " cl ass
st r uggl e" ; t hese
f or mul at i ons si mpl y and f ai t hf ul l y
assume what has not emer ged
f act ual l y . 5 1
He ar gues t hat t he best owal of
" st r uct ur al l y det er mi ned pr i vi l eges"
upon
or gani zed l abour si gnal s t he di ssol ut i on
or " bi f ur cat i on" of t he pr ol et ar i at
qua pr ol et ar i at . Many of t hose bl ue
col l ar pr oduct i on and mai nt enance
wor ker s, and t he
so-cal l ed mi ddl e cl ass of mal e, whi t e col l ar ,
admi ni st r at i ve
and t echni cal wor ker s
wi t hi n t he uni oni zed ol i gopol y and
st at e sect or s
become a l abour el i t e wi t h
r el at i vel y pr i vi l egedaccess t o l at e capi t al i sm' s ever -
expandi ng pr oduct i ve f or ces . Of
cour se, t hi s i s one aspect of t he basi s of
popul ar suppor t f or r ef or mi st
" soci al -democr at i c" l abour par t i es such as t he
Br i t i sh
Labour Par t y, t he Fr ench P. C. F. , and t he
Feder al Republ i c of
Ger many' s
S. P. D. I n Mar xi an t er ms : t he r at eof expl oi t at i on
( i . e. , t he r at e of
sur pl us val ue,
or t he r at i o bet ween sur pl us val ue and wages)
becomes
ext r emel y uneven.
As
many
empi r i cal st udi es of l at e capi t al i sm' s hi ghl y
skewed di st r i but i on of weal t h and
i ncome suggest , t her e occur s at empor ar y
r e-di st r i but i on of i ncome and
ot her benef i t s t o t he det r i ment of t hose out si de
6 0
THELEGACYOF
POLI TI CALECONOMY
t he " st r uct ur al l y pr i vi l eged"
zones .
I t shoul d be not ed t hat
Of f e i s not her e pr oposi ng a var i at i on on
t he t heme
of mass soci et y or
embour geoi sement . For t hose wi t hi n t he
" per i pher i es" ,
wi t hi n st r at egi cal l y l ess
vi t al ar eas ( e. g. , t he i nmat es of i nst i t ut i ons,
t hose on
wel f ar e and
pensi ons, abor i gi nal and i mmi gr ant peopl es,
economi cal l y
depr essed
r ur al and nat i onal r egi ons, sl ums,
t he ar eas of publ i c
t r anspor t at i on,
heal t h, and housi ng) ar e r el at i vel y
negl ect ed i nt hi s scenar i o.
Accor di ng t o Of f e, t he f ur t her t he syst em of
pol i t i cal economy and
commodi f i cat i on i s cent r al i zed, t he mor e whol e
gr oups ar e " expel l ed" f r om
t hi s syst em
: " . . . t he pauper i smof t he ear l y capi t al i st
pr ol et ar i at has gi venway
t o t he moder n
pauper i smof depr essed ar eas . "
5 a
At any poi nt i n t i me t he
degr ee of
t hi s " mar gi nal i zat i on" i s di r ect l y cont i ngent
upon t he ext ent t o
whi ch t he st at e' s
r esour ces ar e r equi r ed f or mor e
" ur gent " pr oj ect s : some
adj ust ed bal ance
bet ween t he need t o guar ant ee and
pr omot e pr i vat e
i nvest ment wi t hout
pr i ce i nf l at i on; " f ul l " empl oyment ; t he
avoi dance of maj or
mi l i t ar y
conf l i ct s ; t he r epr oduct i on of i nt er nat i onal
t r ade; and t he r epr essi on
of domest i c
unr est . Accor di ng t o Of f e, t he el ect or al ,
l egi sl at i ve, execut i ve,
admi ni st r at i ve and
j udi ci al br anches of t he l at e capi t al i st st at e
can be seen
t her ef or e as
" f i l t er s" or " sor t i ng pr ocesses" wi t h a
mar ked degr ee of
" sel ect i vi t y" .
I ndependent l y of t he pr of essed i nt ent i ons and
pr omi ses of
par t i cul ar pol i t i cal
par t i es, ci vi l ser vant s and pol i t i ci ans, t he ver y
" l ocat i on" of
t he i nst i t ut i onal st r uct ur es of
t he st at e vi s- a- vi s t he accumul at i on
pr ocess, pr e-
det er mi ne t hese i nst i t ut i ons'
def i ni t i on of what i s t aken t obe a pol i t i cal
need.
The st at e syst emat i cal l y
enf or ces " non- deci si ons" . 5 9 Thi s al so
means,
however ,
t hat t he pot ent i al conf l i ct s whi ch r emai n
i nher ent i n t he pr i vat e
mode
of capi t al ut i l i zat i on ar e at t he same t i me
t he l east l i kel y t oer upt . Of f e' s
poi nt i s t hat t hese pot ent i al conf l i ct s t end
t o " r ecede" behi nd t he pol i t i cal l y-
det er mi ned conf l i ct s wi t hi n t he
depr essed zones, st r i f e whi ch no l onger
di r ect l y assumes
t he f or mof " cl ass
st r uggl e" .
The exi st ence of t hi s
pr i vi l ege- gr ant i ng sel ect i vi t y i s
Of f e' s way of poi nt i ng
t o t he degr ee of r epr essi ve
bi as of t he l at e capi t al i st st at e,
and i ndi cat es al so
why t hi s appar at us nowadays
st r i ves t o become
t echnocr at i c i n i t s mode of
oper at i on. As Of f e says,
t he conf l i ct - r i dden, di scur si ve
pol i t i cs of t he l i ber al
capi t al i st past must
t oday become t he
st at i st - admi ni st r at i ve si l enci ng
and
pr ocessi ng of
i t s obj ect s :
The wel f ar e st at e i s
devel opi ng st ep- by- st ep, r el uct ant l y
and i nvol unt ar i l y .
I t i s not kept i n mot i onby t he
` pul l ' of a
consci ous
pol i t i cal wi l l , but r at her by
t he ` push' of
emer gent r i sks, danger s, or
bot t l enecks, and newl y
cr eat ed i nsecur i t i es or
pot ent i al conf l i ct s whi ch
demand
6
1
JOHN
KEANE
i mmedi at e
measures t hat avoi d t he
soci al l y dest abi l i zi ng
probl emof t he moment
. The l ogi c of t he wel f are
st at e i s
not t he real i zat i on of
some i nt ri nsi cal l y val uabl e
human
goal but rat her t he
prevent i on of a pot ent i al l y
di sast rous
soci al probl em.
Theref ore, wel f are st at es
everywhere
demonst rat e t hat
t he t endency of bei ng t ransf ormed
i s
l ess a mat t er
of pol i t i cs t han a mat t er of
t echnocrat i c
cal cul us. 6
o
Of f e here al l udes t o
what can be cal l ed t he unspoken,
yet cont radi ct ory
charact er of admi ni st ered
pol i t i cs i n our t i me: t he
more our l i ves are
" pol i t i ci zed" t hrough
st at e act i ons, t hemore we are
expect edt o " de- pol i t i ci ze"
oursel ves, t o busy our
mut ed sel ves wi t hi n a cul t ure
whi ch promot es publ i c
si l ence andpri vat e
ori ent at i on t owards career, l ei sure
andconsumpt i on. That
t he possi bi l i t y
of t rul y part i ci pat ory deci si on- maki ng
i s at t enuat ed under t he
condi t i ons of
l at e capi t al i smi s not f ort ui t ous.
The at t empt ed mai nt enance of
mass l oyal t y t hrough de- pol i t i ci zat i on
i s f at ed, becauseonewhol e range
of t he
st at e' s pri ori t i es -
t hose concerni ng t he pri vat e appropri at i on
of soci al i zed
product i on - must
be wi t hdrawn f rompubl i c di scussi on
. Subst ant i ve
democrat i zat i on woul d
" overl oad" t hi s al ready- burdened
apparat us wi t h
demands whi ch, i n t urn, mi ght
bri ng t o popul ar consci ousness
t heant agoni sm
bet ween t he l ogi c of
admi ni st rat i vel y soci al i zed
product i on andt hecont i nued
pri vat e appropri at i on
and use of surpl us val ue. 6 1
To
be sure, a f ormof " publ i c l i f e"
i s ret ai ned. Thi s ret ent i on has i t s
syst emi c
rat i onal e, because t he qual i t at i ve and
quant i t at i ve i ncrease of st at e
act i vi t y
must be
l egi t i mat ed. " Publ i ci t y" , t heref ore,
i s not si mpl y a sham, f or i t comes
t o have symbol i c use
f or t hose who bureaucrat i cal l y
pl an and admi ni st er .
Consci ous pol i t i cal act i vi t y
begi ns t o f al l under t he
spel l of abst ract
rat i onal i zat i on . As Of f e
argues ( here f ol l owi ng Habermas) ,
t he st at e and
publ i c opi ni on makers t ake on t he
t ask of i deol ogypl anni ng, of
creat i ng webs
of t hought
andspeech whi chpromot ean
undi f f erent i at ed" f ol l owt hel eader"
def erence among
t he st at e' s cl i ent s .
6 2
Net works
of " publ i c meet i ngs" ,
enqui ri es andsel ect
i nvest i gat i ve commi t t ees, t he
sensat i onal i zi ng of pol i t i cal
personal i t i es, part y conf l i ct ,
and t he generat i on of spect acl es
f requent an
apparent l y open " publ i c l i f e" . The
cri t i cal cont ent of publ i c l i f e,
however,
t ends
t o be removed; t here i s an " erosi on
of t he genui nel y publ i c real m. "
6
Therewi t h,
l i beral democracy' s rosy hopes f or
" publ i c l i f e" succumb t o l at e
bourgeoi s
cyni ci sm; at l east si nce Weber and
Schumpet er, t hi s i s expressed i n
t he movement
t o re- def i ne and f ormal i ze t he
concept of " democracy" i n
accord wi t h al l eged
admi ni st rat i ve i mperat i ves.
" Democracy" comes t o
si gni f y a t echni cal
means of mai nt ai ni ng syst em" equi l i bri um"
. The sel f -
6 2
THE
LEGACYOFPOLITICALECONOMY
t r ansf or mat i ve, devel opment al di mensi ons of ear l i er model s of l i ber al
democr acy t end t o be f or got t en or di smi ssed as " unr eal i st i c"
. 64
The Ret ur n of Cr i si s?
Her e we can r ecapi t ul at e Of f e' s ar gument . Commensur at e wi t hi t s r ol e as a
capi t al i st st at e, t he cent r al i mper at i ve of t he st at e' s al l ocat i ve and pr oduct i ve
pol i ci es i s t he st abi l i zat i on and uni ver sal i zat i on of t he commodi t y f or m.
Ther eby, t hi s st at e appar at us i s const r ai ned t o sat i sf y t wo necessar y
condi t i ons of t he accumul at i on pr ocess -namel y, t hat l abour power i s
empl oyabl e and does i ndeed f i nd empl oyment " on t he mar ket " and, f ur t her ,
t hat i ndi vi dual uni t s of capi t al f i nd i t pr of i t abl e t o empl oy t hi s l abour . As we
have seen, t he r eal i sat i on of t hi s cr i si s-avoi dance st r at egy r equi r es t hat , f or
t he sake of manoeuvr eabi l i t y i n t he execut i on of i t s st r uct ur al l y-det er mi ned
f unct i ons, t he st at e
must cr eat e r equi si t e vol umes of mass l oyal t y. Unl i ke i t s
l i ber al capi t al i st count er par t ( whi ch
coul d be l egi t i mat ed by non-i nt er f er ence
wi t ht he wor ki ngs of t he i nvi si bl e hand of pr i vat e
mar ket s) , t he hand of t he
l at e capi t al i st st at e must somehowbe hi dden behi nd t he
backs of i t s
const i t uent s, by pr ocl ai mi ng i t s " neut r al i t y" -as pr omot er of l awf ul or der ,
j ust i ce, democr acy, pr ogr ess and pr osper i t y f or al l . Unl i ke t he si l ent
domi nat i on of t he ol d mar ket , " t he of f i ci al power embodi ed i n pol i t i cal
i nst i t ut i ons f i nds i t sel f f or ced t o decl ar e andj ust i f y i t sel f as power . " 65 Thi s, f or
Of f e, i s t he st r uct ur al pr obl emof t he l at e capi t al i st st at e, namel y, " t hat t he
St at e
must
at
t he same t i mepr act i se i t s cl ass char act er andkeepi t conceal ed. "
El sewher e: " t he st at e can onl yf unct i on as a capi t al i st st at e by appeal i ng t o
symbol s
and sour ces of suppor t t hat conceal i t s nat ur e as a capi t al i st st at e; t he
exi st ence of a capi t al i st st at e
pr esupposes t he syst emat i c deni al of i t s nat ur e as
a capi t al i st st at e. "
66
Thi s st r uct ur al pr obl em becomes t he f ocus of Of f e' s r endi t i on of t he
anal yt i c, pol i t i cal l y-char ged cat egor i es of appear ance and r eal i t y, cont r adi c-
t i on, cr i si s and i nt er vent i on. These can be out l i ned andel abor at ed. It i s Of f e' s
convi ct i on t hat appear ances wi t hi n l at e capi t al i smar e necessar i l y i n t ensi on
wi t ht hi s soci et y' s " i nst i t ut i onal i zed set of r ul es" , cl ass domi nat i oni n pol i t i cal
f or m. Thi s di al ect i c of appear ance andr eal i t y has
t he f or ce
of a
cont r adi ct i on
-i t i s not si mpl y a di l emma -i n t hat t he st at e' s al l ocat i ve and pr oduct i ve
at t empt s at uni ver sal i zi ng t he commodi t y f or mt end t o under mi ne i t s own
sel f -
pr ocl ai med appear ances and, t her ef or e, t hose ver y condi t i ons of de-
pol i t i ci zat i on on whi chi t s act i vi t i es depend so desper at el y f or t hei r cont i nued
r epr oduct i on. The essent i al l ogi c of l at e capi t al i st accumul at i on i n pol i t i cal
f or mi s si mul t aneousl y t he l ogi c of i t s possi bl e t r anscendence. The r eal i t y of
t hi s l ogi c i s t hat of unr eal i st i c goal s : " al l advancedcapi t al i st soci et i es
. . .
cr eat e
63
JOHNKEANE
endemi c syst emi c probl ems and l arge- scal e unmet needs . "
6 7
Thesepol i t i cal
cri si s- t endenci es become t he obj ect i vel y gi ven si t uat i on of conf usi on wi t hi n
whi cht hoseengagedi n, or ont hemargi ns of , pol i t i cal di scussi onandact i vi t y
may
come t o real i ze t hat t he pat t ern of t hei r act ual soci al rel at i ons i s
cont radi ct ory andi rrat i onal . Thi s i s Of f e' s remarkabl eat t empt at recoveri ng
t hat i mmanent cri t i que of
t he present whi ch has
so
bedevi l l ed and el uded
t went i et h cent ury Marxi smand cri t i cal t heory
f romt he t i me of Lukacs'
unsat i sf act ory desi gnat i on of t he prol et ari at as t he
i dent i cal subj ect - obj ect .
The t heses on pol i t i cal cri si s can be seen as an ef f ort at
art i cul at i ng t hose
pot ent i al
conf l i ct zones wi t hi n
whi ch i nheres t he di al ect i cal t ensi on bet ween
t he abst ract , quant i t at i ve, i nst rument al rat i onal i t y of t hepast andpresent and
t he possi bl e f ut ureburst i ng f ort h of aqual i t at i vel y newrat i onal i t y.
Not et hat
t hi s f ormul at i on i s by no means synonymous wi t h a " cat ast rophe
t heory of
hi st ory" , wi t h a crude t heory of aut omat i c, bl i nd, l awf ul col l apse
. For,
pol i t i cal cri si s si t uat i ons are t he obj ect i ve cont ext s
i n whi ch
subj ect i ve
i nt ervent i on ( " speaki ng out " , cont est at i on) becomes possi bl e, and i s most
l i kel y t o be successf ul . The obj ect s of syst em
di f f i cul t i es maybecomesubj ect s,
moreor l ess sel f - consci ous
of t hat paral ysi s
and,
t hus, act i ve i n i t s resol ut i on.
Fi nal l y, t hi s i s t he poi nt of Of f e' s cri t i que of l at e capi t al i sm: i t seeks an
enri ched expl anat i on of t hat whi ch may al ready be gl i mpsed or known
conf usedl y among wi der segment s of t he popul at i on.
Of f e i nf uses t hese cat egori cal f orms wi t h empi ri cal cont ent by poi nt i ng t o
several di f f i cul t i es whi ch have begun t o haunt t he l at e capi t al i st count ri es .
Fi rst , Of f e appropri at es t heearl i er Baranand Sweezy t hesi s
t o argue t hat t he
st at e' s at t empt s at admi ni st eri ng t he accumul at i on process t end t o become
more . and more cost l y. 6 8 I n ot her words, t he sel f - expansi on of
capi t al
( especi al l y wi t hi nt he morehi ghl y prof i t abl e ol i ogopol y sect or) becomes
more
and more cont i ngent upon gi ant i nvest ment proj ect s, huge capi t al
out l ays,
and growi ng " soci al
overhead cost s" . Wi t hi n l at e capi t al i sm, t here i s a
permanent
under- ut i l i zat i on of capi t al andl ack of i nvest ment out l et s . Tot he
ext ent t hat t hest at e seeks t oovercome pri vat ecapi t al ' s l i qui di t y pref erence by
soci al i zi ng capi t al andsoci al overhead cost s, t hel i kel i hoodof f i scal
probl ems
t heref ore grows . As Of f e demonst rat es i na recent st udy of
t he
West
German
const ruct i on i ndust ry, st at e at t empt s t o i ncrease t he l evel of revenues or co-
operat i on f romcorporat e sources run t he ri sk of capi t al di sempl oyi ng i t sel f .
The real source of t he f i scal probl ems l i es i n t he asymmet ry bet ween t he
growi ng soci al i zat i on of capi t al andsoci al overheadcost s by
t hest at e, andt he
cont i nui ng pri vat e appropri at i on of
prof i t s . 6 9 Thus, i n l at e capi t al i smst at e
expendi t ures ( whose" cost - benef i t " account i ng i s not ori ousl y di f f i cul t ) t end t o
out runst at erevenues, t o t he poi nt wheret he st at e must seek t o " cut back" , t o
rat i onal i ze i t s own expendi t ure pat t erns . The si gni f i cance of t hese f i scal
probl ems i s t hat at l east several of t he measures ai medat t hei r amel i orat i on
THE
LEGACYOFPOLITICALECONOMY
( e . g. , managed r ecessi on,
t he i nt r oduct i on of "wage and pr i ce
cont r ol s",
"get t i ng t he nat i onof f t he gover nment
payr ol l ", et c . ) onl y ser ve t o
under mi ne
t he basi s of mass l oyal t y and
de- pol i t i ci zat i on uponwhi ch t he
st at e depends .
In
addi t i on, even i f st at e at t empt s
at "economi zi ng" andmai nt ai ni ng
t he
empl oyment of ol i gopol i st i c capi t al
ar e successf ul , Of f e st r esses
t hat t hi s can
onl y be achi evedat t he r i sk of
gener at i ng "sur pl us l abour power " . 1 0
Wi t hi nt he
ol i gopol y ( and st at e? ) sect or t her e
i s a const ant t endency f or t he
or gani c
composi t i on of capi t al t o i ncr ease,
t hat i s, f or capi t al - l abour r at i os
t o r i se
cont i nual l y.
The unempl oyment of l abour
power becomes t he obver se of t he
st at e' s
at t empt s at uni ver sal i zi ng t he
commodi t y f or m. The st r at um
of
unempl oyed l abour i s pr oduced
not by economi c r ecessi on
but by
"pr osper ous
t i mes", andi s i nno way
a "r eser ve ar my of t he unempl oyed"
f or
ot her sect or s of t he pol i t i cal
economy. Mor e andmor e, t hi s sur pl us
l abour -
whi ch may t hr eat en f i scal aust er i t y
pr ogr ammes or ( as dur i ng t he st udent
movement ) condi t i ons of
de- pol i t i ci zat i on - i s housedwi t hi nt he
ur banand
r ur al
ghet t os, onr eser ves, wi t hi n
mi l i t ar y i nst i t ut i ons, andi neducat i onal
and
t r ai ni ng
pr ogr ammes whi ch ef f ect i vel y
ext end t he per i odof adol escence
and
unempl oyment .
Thi r dl y, Of f e poi nt s t o t he
i mpossi bi l i t y of t he st at e becomi ng an
"i deal
col l ect i ve capi t al i st " ( Engel s) because
of st r uct ur al l i mi t s uponi t s at t empt s
at
cent r al i zed, bur eaucr at i c,
mi ddl e- r ange pl anni ng f or t he
r epr oduct i on of
capi t al . Thi s canbe seenas a
conf r ont at i onwi t h t he Weber i an
ar gument t hat
t he deci si ve r eason f or t he advance
of i mper sonal bur eaucr at i c f or ms
of
or gani zat i on i s t hei r t echni cal
super i or i t y compar ed wi t h ot her means
of
soci al goal at t ai nment . Indeed, under
t he condi t i ons of l at e capi t al i sm,
cent r al i zed- bur eaucr at i c at t empt s t o "f i nel y t une" and
coor di nat e t he
execut i on
of al l ocat i ve and pr oduct i ve pol i ci es ar e
hi ghl y i nef f ect i ve . Thi s i s
because of
di scr epanci es bet weenr equi r ed st at e f unct i ons- ( t he
achi evement of
speci f i c concr et e
r esul t s) and t hi s st at e' s i nt er nal modes
of oper at i on
accor di ng t o t he l ogi c
of gener al admi ni st r at i ve r ul es . Thus,
pat t er ns of
pr i vat e owner shi p andcont r ol wi t hi n
t he ol i gopol y and compet i t i ve sect or s,
t he
cont i nui ng compet i t i on bet ween
capi t al i st ent er pr i ses, and t he
compet i t i on
of capi t al wi t h ot her gr oups
( envi r onment al i st s, unr ul y l abour
uni ons, et c . ) t end
t o hi nder or pr i vat i ze t he st at e' s
gener al pl anni ng act i vi t i es .
Envi r onment al
t ur bul ence becomes i nt er nal i zed wi t hi n
t he st at e appar at us,
wi t h possi bl e i l l egi t i mat i ng
consequences . Thi s i s f ur t her
aggr avat edby t he
f act t hat t he l engt h of t he
pr oduct i oncycl es of t he st at e' s pr oduct i ve act i vi t i es
i s unusual l y gr eat .
Over al l , t hese f act or s mar k t he
st at e' s act i vi t i es wi t h a vaci l l at i ng,
act i ve-
r eact i ve char act er , descr i bed by Of f e i n t er ms
of "t he pol i t i cal del i mma of
t echnocr acy" t heor em.
Onmany occasi ons, t he l at e
capi t al i st st at e cl umsi l y
muddl es a mi d- cour se
t hr ough pr oposed ( and obj ect i vel y
r equi r ed)
65
JOHNKEANE
i nt er vent i on
andf or ced r enunci at i on of such pl ans .
Thi s "muddl i ngt hr ough"
i s a consequence
of what Of f e descr i bes as t he syst emi c
i mper at i ve of
"admi ni st r at i ve
r ecommodi f i cat i on" . One set of pr i or i t i es
( t he need t o
r epr oduce t he
pr i vat e appr opr i at i on of soci al i zed pr oduct i on)
must be
accomodat ed wi t hi n
t he t heor y and pr act i ce of pol i cy
pl anni ng and publ i c
admi ni st r at i on.
Her e Mar x' s cr i t i que of Hegel i s r esur r ect ed.
Accor di ng t o
Of f e, t he st r uct ur al l y
pr i vi l egedaccess ( andpossi bl e opposi t i on)
of or gani zed
l abour and ol i gopol y
capi t al t o t he st at e' s deci si on
maki ng pr ocesses
unwi t t i ngl y subor di nat es
t hat admi ni st r at i on t o par t i cul ar ,
"pr i vat e"
i nt er est s . St at e pl anner s'
i r r at i onal r el i ance upon t he f or mat i on
and co-
oper at i on of t hese or gani zed
bl ocs seems f at ed. Thus, t he st at e i s
not si mpl y
( as i n l i ber al capi t al i sm) an
unconsci ous execut i ve or gan. Af t er al l ,
i t does
make del i ber at e at t empt s t o
avoi deconomi c cr i ses, t o absor b soci al
expenses,
andso on, but by vi r t ue of
t he f act t hat i t i s act ual l y vi ct i mi zed by
asyst emof
accumul at i on whi ch i t
seeks t o r egul at e, t hi s st at e nowsuf f er s
f r oma ki nd of
"second or der ", mor e
di f f use, unconsci ousness
. 71
These speci f i c di f f i cul t i es
( under empl oyment of l abour ,
budget ar y
i nf l at i on, muddl i ngt hr ough)
ar e seen by Of f e as sympt omat i c of a
mor e deep-
seat ed
cont r adi ct i on wi t hi n t he l at e capi t al i st
pol i t i cal economy. Thi s i s t he
cel ebr at ed
"t heor y of decommodi f i cat i on" .
Easi l y t he most novel and l east
compel l i ng cf Of f e' s t heses, i t shoul d
be seen as a suppl ement t o t he
ear l i er -
ment i oned t heor y of t he pr ot est
pot ent i al of "mar gi nal i zat i on" .
The t hesi s
concer ns t he wel f ar e st at e' s
at t empt t o r epr oduce t he
commodi t y f or m( i . e. ,
t he exchange of l abour and
capi t al ) t hr ough non- commodi f i ed
means, and
can be expr essed pr ovocat i vel y: How
can t he "publ i c" sect or
pr oduce and
di st r i but e use- val ues ( t r anspor t at i on,
post al syst ems, educat i on,
heal t h, t he
pr ovi si on of secur i t y agai nst
unempl oyment ) f or a spher e
domi nat ed by
exchange val ues wi t hout
cal l i ng i nt o quest i on t he i dea and
pr act i ce of t he
l at t er ? Howcan
concr et e, di f f er ent i at ed, i ncommensur abl e
l abour - l abour
di r ect ed
t owar ds t he pr oduct i on of use- val ues
- cont i nue t o be l egi t i mat ed
and
mot i vat ed wi t h r ef er ence t o t he ol d
i deol ogy of possessi ve i ndi vi dual i sm
and t he r eal mof abst r act ,
homogeni zed l abour , l abour
or i ent ed t owar ds t he
pr oduct i on of val ue
f or exchange? I n what ways can
t he mai nt enance of t he
commodi t y
f or maccomodat e t he expansi on
of st at e pol i ci es whi ch
ar e
exempt f r omt hi s f or m? As Of f e expl ai ns :
The cont r adi ct i on wi t hi n
st at e- or gani zed pr oduct i on of
goods and ser vi ces i s
one of f or mand cont ent . By t hei r
or i gi n and f unct i onal
cont ent , such or gani zat i ons
ar e
desi gned
t o cr eat e opt i ons of exchange
f or bot h l abour
and capi t al . By t hei r f or mal
and admi ni st r at i ve mode of
66
THELEGACYOFPOLI TI CALECONOMY
oper at i on t hey ar e exempt f r omcommodi t y r el at i onshi ps:
use- val ues ar e pr oduced and di st r i but ed wi t hout
bei ng
cont r ol l ed and domi nat ed by exchange val ues . 7 z
Not e t hat
obj ect i ons may
be
r ai sed agai nst t wo key assumpt i ons i n t hi s
ar gument . Fi r st , Of f e' s r esur r ect i on of t he cl assi cal Mar xi an cont r ast of
exchange anduse- val ues i s cer t ai nl y sur pr i si ng i n vi ewof hi s ear l i er ar gument
t hat t he over comi ng of l i ber al capi t al i sm' s mar ket - st eer ed, cr i si s- r i dden
accumul at i on pr ocess pr ovi des an " i nt er nal cr i t i que" of t hose cat egor i es .
Secondl y, t he assumpt i on t hat t he st at e' s al l ocat i ve andpr oduct i ve act i vi t i es
ar e cor r el at ed di r ect l y wi t h
soci al needs begs quest i ons about t he ver aci t y of
t hese " use- val ues" . Ar e not
t he f or mand cont ent of at l east some st at e-
pr ovi ded
" ut i l i t i es"
di st or t ed a
pr i or i
by
t hei r obj ect ( capi t al accumul at i on) ?
Not wi t hst andi ng t hese doubt s, Of f e' s concl usi ons ar e cl ear . Decommodi f i -
cat i on wi t hi n t he l at e capi t al i st " publ i c" sect or est abl i shes a " soci al i z ed" f or m
of or gani z at i on whi ch at t he same t i me pr omot es and, because of i t s cl ass
char act er , t hwar t s t he possi bi l i t y of a set of soci al r el at i ons f r eed f r omt he
cur se
of t he r at i onal i z ed commodi t y
f or m. 7 3 Thi s al i en " l i ber at ed base" of
decommodi f i ed act i vi t y i s i n no way a r esi due of pr e- capi t al i st soci al
exi st ence. I t si gnal s a newand vi t al " need" whi ch t hi s soci al f or mat i on has
cr eat ed, upon
whi ch
i t depends, but
whi ch
i t cannot sat i sf y
.
Of f e
emphasi z es
t hat t hi s i s
t he
r eason why al l st at e- pr ovi ded " ser vi ces" ( whi ch ar e seen t o be
ai medat r eal i si ng commodi t y exchange andhuman needs) have a t hor oughl y
ambi guous, char act er :
`Pr osper i t y f or al l ' i s t he sl ogan of an economi c pol i cy
whi ch causes t he di st r i but i on of weal t h t o become mor e
and mor e unequal ; `Educat i on as a Ci vi l Ri ght ' i s
pr ocl ai med when bot t l enecks ar e not i ced i n t he l abour
mar ket ; capi t al ' s concer n
about
t he i nvest ment
of
t he
def ence i ndust r y l yi ng f al l owcor r esponds t o t he appeal t o
t he popul at i on' s f ear of Communi st aggr essi on; t he
devel opment of means of dest r uct i on i s r at i onal i z ed as a
means
of devel opi ng t he f or ces of pr oduct i on; t he
nur t ur i ng of concer n f or count r i es
of t he Thi r d Wor l d
pr ovi des t he l egi t i mat i on backgr ound f or a f ar - si ght ed
t appi ng of capi t al - and sel l i ng - mar ket s . 7 '
J OHNKEANE
Of equal l y pr essi ng i mpor t ance for Offe i s t he fact t hat t he spr ead of
decommodi fi cat i on si gnal s . t he under mi ni ng of t he i nst i t ut i onal bases of
cer t ai n key component s of bour geoi s t hought and speech. The "mor al fi ber of
a
capi t al i st commodi t y soci et y"
i s
shat t er ed; a "l egi t i mat i on vacuum"
emer ges . 1 s The focus of t hi s ar gument i s excl usi vel y on
t he fat e of t he i deol ogy
of possessi ve i ndi vi dual i sm or "t he achi evement pr i nci pl e" . Fr om
t he
sevent eent h cent ur y t hi s wor l d- vi ewl egi t i mat ed t he spr ead of non- pol i t i cal ,
i nst r ument al exchange r el at i ons t hr oughout Eur ope. 7 b The t r i umph
of
possessi ve i ndi vi dual i smby t he ni net eent h cent ur y mar ked a r evol ut i on
i n t he
under st andi ng of ont ol ogy: t he i ndi vi dual ' s essence was seen t o be
t hat of an
i nsat i abl e desi r er and consumer of ut i l i t i es . Accor di ngl y, t he fr eedom
of t hi s
i ndi vi dual coul d onl y be r eal i sed
t hr ough anensembl e
of compet i t i ve mar ket
r el at i ons, i n whi ch i ndi vi dual s wer e t o wi el d t hei r l abour
power and pr oper t y
i nst r ument al l y, t hat i s, wi t hout r egar d for t he subst ant i ve goal s of
ot her
compet i t or s . Pr i vat el y medi at ed exchange
wi t h out er nat ur e was seen t o be
t he onl y way t o accumul at e
soci al weal t h and
happi ness . "The
achi evi ng
soci et y
i s
based on t he gener al r ul e t hat t he soci al st at us of an i ndi vi dual i s
supposed t o depend upon hi s st at us i n t he spher e of wor k and pr oduct i on,
whi l e i n t ur n hi s st at us wi t hi n t he hi er ar chi cal or gani zat i ons of t he pr oduct i on
spher e i s meant t o depend on hi s i ndi vi dual per for mance. " 7 7
Accor di ng t o Offe, t he
basi s
of
t hese not i ons has beenl i qui dat edby four key
devel opment s si nce t he heyday of l i ber al capi t al i sm. Eachof t hese pr ocesses
i s
associ at ed wi t h t he r enewed i mpor t ance of st at e act i vi t y . Fi r st , t he
foundat i ons
of
t he not i on of
fr ee, mar ket - al l ocat ed l abour as t he means of
i ndi vi dual achi evement ar e cast asi de i nasmuch as ( a) bot h pol i t i cal and
economi c power ar e i ncr easi ngl y monopol i zed by l ar ge, bur eaucr at i c
or gani zat i ons
whi ch
begi n t o effect an end of "t he i ndi vi dual " ; 7 8 and ( b) a
pl anned, uni on- medi at ed,
i ncr easi ngl y aut omat ed l abour pr ocess r el at i vel y
i mmune fr omt he compet i t i ve t hr eat of a r eser ve ar my has emer ged. 7 9
Secondl y, t he st at e' s pr ovi si on of t r ansfer payment s and subsi di es ( for t hose
who ar e "under - capi t al i zed", t oo young, ol d, or psychosomat i cal l y di sabl ed)
t ends t o snap t he once- al l eged bonds bet ween t he
achi evement
pr i nci pl e of
mar ket act i vi t y and r emuner at i on for t hat act i vi t y . I n many zones, "wor k"
and "pay" ar e l ess cl osel y i nt er r el at ed
as i ndi vi dual s fi nd t hemsel ves
t empor ar i l y or per manent l y out si de t he
spher e
of t he
l abour
mar ket . The
for mer dependence on t he vi ci ssi t udes of t he mar ket i s r epl aced by gr owi ng
dependence on t he l ogi c of st at e act i vi t y . 8 0
Most i mpor t ant l y, per haps, i s t hat wi t h t he spr ead of zones of "concr et e
l abour ",
t he r at i onal e of abst r act l abour i s under mi ned. Havi ngexpanded i t s
al l ocat i ve and pr oduct i ve pol i ci es, t he st at e makes i t sel f t he focus of pol i t i cal
confl i ct over t he ways i n whi ch soci al r esour ces
shoul d be ut i l i zed. Soci al
l abour wi t hi n t hese zones becomes a subj ect of cr i t i ci smnot onl y i n t er ms of i t s
68
THELEGACYOFPOLI TI CALECONOMY
quant i t at i ve r emuner at i on, but al so accor di ngt o i t s qual i t at i vel y det er mi ned
t el os. The i l l egi t i mat i ng ef f ect s of l ess t hat f ul l empl oyment af f or d no bet t er
exampl e of what Of f e means by t he under mi ni ng of t he basi s of possessi ve
i ndi vi dual i sm. 8 1 Wher eas i n l i ber al capi t al i sm unempl oyment was of t en
per cei ved bl i ndl y as a per i odi c event i n t he economi c cycl e or seen t o be t he
f aul t of t he l azy or i ncompet ent i ndi vi dual , i n l at e capi t al i smadmi ni st r at i ve
at t empt s at i ncr easi ng unempl oyment ( e. g. , t hr ough"cut backs" i n t he st at e
sect or ) l ead di r ect l y t o t he
quest i oni ng
of t he mot i ves of
t hat admi ni st r at i on.
Unempl oyment t ends t o be r eveal ed as i nt ent i onal , as pol i t i cal l y i nspi r ed . I t
becomes quest i onabl e. Anot her st r i ki ng exampl e of t hi s subl at i on of t he
r at i onal e of possessi ve i ndi vi dual i sm can be seen i n t he wi despr ead
i nvol vement of f eder al , pr ovi nci al and l ocal gover nment s i n t he pl anni ngand
r egul at i on of ur ban and r egi onal gr owt h. By t hei r act i ons, t hese gover nment s,
r eveal t he i r r at i onal i t y of t he pr i vat e owner shi pand cont r ol of l and, as var i ous
ci t i zens' act i on gr oups have poi nt ed out . These gover nment s become
account abl e f or consci ousl y pl anned i nt er vent i ons i n a domai n t hat ,
accor di ng t o t he ol d bour geoi s i deol ogy,
was supposed
t o be r egul at ed by
pr i vat e cal cul at i on and cr i t er i a of pr of i t abi l i t y .
The Legacy of Pol i t i cal Economy: The Pr obl em
of
Symbol i c I nt er act i on
The subl at i on of t he symbol i c andpr oduct i ve
exchange val ue f or mt hr ough
t he spr ead of zones of
pr oduct i on f or soci al use i s t he pr i mar y r eason why Of f e
pr ef er s t he expr essi on l at e capi t al i sm. To speak of l at e capi t al i st soci al
f or mat i ons not onl y i ndi cat es t hat , i n t hei r r epr oduct i on, r esour ces of
l egi t i mat i on ar e nowmost cr uci al ( economi c and pol i t i cal r esour ces havi ng
al r eady been used up i n war di ng of f cr i ses, so t o speak) , but al so t hat such
symbol i c r esour ces ar e i n danger of bei ng exhaust ed.
Mor eover , t he
exacer bat i on of t he st at e' s st r uct ur al
pr obl em
by
such l egi t i mat i on def i ci t s
becomes t he obj ect i ve
cont ext wi t hi n whi ch emanci pat i on- i nspi r ed
i nt er vent i on by t he f or ces of opposi t i on t o t he commodi f i cat i on of l at e
capi t al i st soci et y may emer ge. Thi s, Of f e cl ai ms, i s t he r eason why st at e
act i vi t i es ar e becomi ng mor e and mor e aut hor i t ar i an:
8 2
Ther e i s no i dent i f i abl e di mensi on i n whi ch new
mechani sms f or t he sel f - per pet uat i on of t he capi t al i st
syst em
. . .
coul d be f ound and appl i ed. What r emai ns i s
t he var i at i on and r ef i nement of t he t r i ad of usual sel f -
69
JOHNKEANE
adapt i ve mechani sms ( t he economi c, pol i t i cal , and
cul t ur al "subsyst ems" JCK) whi chat l east t osomedegr ee
have beenappl i ed i n al l devel opedcapi t al i st syst ems and,
on t he ot her hand, namel y i n t he case of t hei r
i nsuf f i ci ency, ei t her t he hi st or i cal l y unpr oduct i ve or
t he
pr oduct i ve- r evol ut i onar y br eakdown of t he basi c f r ame-
wor k of capi t al i sm.
8 3
Thi s : deduct i on seems ext r emel y hast y. I t i s sympt omat i c of Of f e' s f r ai l
under st andi ng of advanced capi t al i sm' s l egi t i mat i on pr ocess, whi chi ncl udes
t he pr oduct i on and r epr oduct i on of t he symbol s of "ever yday l i f e" wi t hi n t he
domai ns of spor t , l ei sur e, l abour and consumpt i on, sexual i t y and f ami l y l i f e,
r el i gi on, ar t , f or mal pol i t i cal act i vi t y, ur banand count r y l i f e. To speak of t he
symbol i c i nt er act i on of t hi s "ever yday l i f e" i s t o i ndi cat e t hose
communi cat i vel y- pr oduced t r adi t i ons and i nst i t ut i ons wi t hi n whi ch ext ant
st r uct ur es of t he pol i t i cal economy ar e embedded, and upon whi ch such
pol i t i cal - economi c st r uct ur es may f eed, t her eby seemi ng r i ght or l egi t i mat e.
Thr ought hi s pr oduct i onof si gnval ues, hi st or i cal l y ci r cumscr i bed i ndi vi dual s
st r uggl e t o endowt hei r act i ons wi t h meani ng and mot i vat i on
.
I t i s t r ue t hat
such pat t er ns of symbol i c i nt er act i on ar e al ways act i vel y and cont i nual l y
r epr oduced and negot i at ed by t hei r aut hor s; t he r epr oduct i on of
t hese
pat t er ns ent ai l s mor e t han t he mer el y passi ve i nt er nal i zat i on of val ues and
meani ngs . However , under advanced capi t al i st condi t i ons, i t i s al so cer t ai n
t hat t he aut hor s of t hi s symbol i c i nt er act i on nei t her whol l y i nt end i t s
conf i ni ng consequences nor compr ehend t he l ogi c of i t s pr oduct i on
.
Of f e' s censor i ng of t hi s di mensi on of symbol i c
i nt er act i on, of t he human
capaci t y f or symbol - maki ng, speechandi nt er - subj ect i ve
act i on, i s r eveal ed by
hi s quasi - obj ect i vi st t heor y of cr i si s. I t i s as i f t he l at e
capi t al i st pol i t i cal
economy' s st r uct ur al di f f i cul t i es ar e t r ansl at edaut omat i cal l y i nt owi despr ead
consci ousness of t hat br eakup, i nt o a di si nt egr at i on of t he i dent i t y
of t hi s
soci et y' s const i t uent s. Wi despr ead sel f - r ef l ect i on upon soci al
condi t i ons of
dependence and domi nat i on i s t her eby seen t o be a
mer e f eedback of t he
di al ect i c of concr et e and abst r act l abour
. Wi t h some j ust i f i cat i on, t hi s
aut omat i smwas assumed i n t he ol d
base- super st r uct ur e model . Char act er i st i c
of t he r ecent l y r evi ved "pol i t i cal
economy" cr i t i que of advanced capi t al i sm' 4 ,
t hi s aut omat i smnow
succumbs t o a doubl e t heor et i cal bl ackout . I t bot h
under est i mat es t he i nt egr at i ng capaci t y
of newf or ms of symbol i c i nt er act i on
and ( cf . t he
homol ogi es bet ween t he l i ber al capi t al i st syst ems of symbol i c
i nt er act i on and l abour ) t hei r r el at i ve i nvul ner abi l i t y t o di sr upt i ons
i n t he
pol i t i cal economy. These bl ackout s cannot be over come
easi l y by a r esor t t o
syncr et i sm ( "Of cour se, pol i t i cal economy i s
concer ned wi t h ` cul t ur al '
70
THE
LEGACYOFPOLI TI CALECONOMY
quest i ons! " ) . For t hey are
t he consequences of Of f e' s i npri sonment wi t hi n t he
concept ual boundari es
of t he ol d pol i t i cal economy. I n a word,
t hey are a
necessary out come of hi s ret reat
t o Marxi an cat egori es ( concret e and abst ract
l abour) whi ch are no l onger f ul l y subversi ve of advanced
capi t al i sm' s mode of
symbol i cal l y- medi cat ed cl ass
domi nat i on. Of f e' s posi t ed cont rast of abst ract
and concret e l abour, of use val ue
as t he " beyond" of exchange val ue, remai ns
marooned wi t hi n t he " here and
now" of bourgeoi s moderni t y' s f et i shi zed
vi ew
of humans as pri mari l y obj ect i f i ers
andt ransf ormers of out er nat ure under t he
si gn of ut i l i t y and consumpt i on. 8 5
Thi s i s not t o deny t he
ont ol ogi cal st at us of l abour as t hat
concept ual l y-
medi at ed act i vi t y whereby
bot h humans and nat ure are f ashi oned
. Nor i s i t t o
deny t he real
si gni f i cance of much of Of f e' s cri t i cal
underst andi ng of t he
pol i t i cal
economy of advanced capi t al i smf or a more
general cri t i cal soci al
t heory of t he present
. Not wi t hst andi ng some i mmanent di f f i cul t i es,
Of f e' s re-
appropri at i on
of t he cat egori es of concret e and
abst ract l abour has at l east
rai sed i mport ant quest i ons
about t he unt hi nki ng equat i on of l abour
wi t h
i nst rument al act i vi t y by Habermas
and ot hers . 8 6 However, here t he
suggest i on i s more f ar reachi ng, namel y,
t hat under t he condi t i ons of
advanced
capi t al i sm, a cri t i cal soci al t heory wi t h
pract i cal i nt ent i ons i s no
l onger possi bl e
wi t hi n t he suf f ocat i ng, i deol ogi cal
f ormof pol i t i cal economy.
The cri t i que of
advanced capi t al i sm' s mode of
product i on ( cl ass- st eered
accumul at i on
i n pol i t i cal f orm) ceases t o f ul l y
i l l umi nat e t hi s soci et y' s
pri nci pl e of domi nat i on, 8 1 whi ch nowseems much
l ess vul nerabl e t han i t was
i n l i beral capi t al i sm.
Of f e' s announcement of t he arri val
of l at e capi t al i sm
t hrough t he t heory of
decommodi f i cat i on i s t horoughl y
premat ure. Onl y a
cri t i cal consi derat i on of t hi s soci et y' s
mode of symbol i c i nt eract i on and
i t s
t endency t o cast a mant l e of nat ural
f at e over i t s const i t uent s coul d
subst ant i at e t he cl ai mt hat , i n t he l at e
t went i et h cent ury, t he st ruct ural
probl emof t he
capi t al i st st at e, i . e. , t he need t o
l egi t i mat e i t s cl ass charact er,
cannot be repressed
sat i sf act ori l y .
Agai nst t he backdrop
of Of f e' s t heses, t hese cl ai ms
can be i l l ust rat ed very
bri ef l y wi t h ref erence t o
some rat her arbi t rari l y chosen
component s of
cont emporary everyday l i f e.
These i ncl ude t he ri se of conspi cuous
mass
consumpt i on and t he decl i ne of t he
i ndi vi dual , rel i gi on, pol i t i cal cul t ure and
art .
1 .

The al l eged erosi on
of possessi ve i ndi vi dual i sm
i s a hi ghl y compl ex and
ambi guous
devel opment . On t he one hand, t he
decommodi f i cat i on process i n
no way di rect l y chal l enges
one key promi se of hi s ol d
i deol ogy: t hat humani t y
i s
synonymous wi t ht he i nf i ni t e
appropri at i on of use val ues t hrought he act of
consumpt i on. I ndeed,
t he Marxi an di st i nct i on bet ween
exchange and use-
val ues pert ai ned
t o a nowbygone mi l i eu wi t hi n
whi cht here were di f f i cul t i es of
real i sat i on or
under- consumpt i on. These cat egori es
sought t he de-
7 1
J OHNKEANE
myst i f i cat i on
of an age whose st agger i ng pr oduct i ve pot ent i al
( f ounded on
abst r act l abour , "l abour
sans phr ase") coi nci ded wi t h t he deni al of
human
needs, i ncl udi ng t he consumpt i on
of r equi si t e use- val ues and t he expanded
devel opment of subj ect s' "sl umber i ng
power s" t hr oughconcr et e l abour . To
t he ext ent t hat t he l ogi c of "t he hi gh- i nt ensi t y
mar ket set t i ng" ( Wi l l i amLei ss'
apt
phr ase) col oni zes ever yday l i f e i n advanced
capi t al i sm, t hi s f or mul at i on i s
out wi t t ed. I n t he same
way, Of f e' s r el i ance upon
Bel l ' s ar gument t hat t hi s
soci et y gener at es a
subver si ve, pl ayf ul hedoni smi s qui t e
unconvi nci ng. $ $ For ,
t hr ough symbol i c
adver t i si ng, suppl y nowadays cr eat es
ef f ect i ve demand t o
an ext ent unant i ci pat ed
by Mar x or by t he t heor y of
consumer sover ei gnt y.
Thi s t ur n of event s i s
cat al yzed by ot her s . These i ncl ude
t he st at e' s i mpl i cat i on
i n pr oduct i vi t y i ncr eaces,
t he syst emi c abi l i t y t o pay
hi gher r eal wages t o
or gani zed l abour , t he
ext ensi on of cr edi t , and t he
emer gence of a
"nar ci ssi st i c" per sonal i t y
t ype ( whi ch, unl i ke t he ascet i c
"t i cket t hi nki ng" of
t he ol der aut hor i t ar i an
per sonal i t y, emphasi zes
"f un", f r eedom f r om
"hassl es", "bei ng cool ",
et c. ) Over al l , t hese devel opment s
and t he
publ i ci t y gener at ed t hr ough
monopol i st i c compet i t i on hel p
shi f t pr obl ems of
demand f r omt he advanced
capi t al i st cent r es t o t he
i ncr easi ngl y mar gi nal i zed,
per i pher al ,
under devel oped wor l d. The t er r or i st i c
codes of i nst i t ut i onal
"publ i ci t y"
st r i ve t o monopol i ze t he r eal m
of symbol i c i nt er act i on,
cr eat i ng
desi r abl e
st andar ds of ment al and
bodi l y heal t h, f oodst uf f s,
l ove- maki ng,
chi l d- r ai si ng, home decor at i on,
dr ess, t r avel , spor t ,
ent er t ai nment , and
pat t er ns of speech. A
cr i t i cal t heor y of t hi s
r at i onal i zat i on pr ocess, of t he
degr ee t o whi cha per manent
consumpt i ve pul l can
monopol i ze t he ver y soul
of
i ndi vi dual s, i s r equi r ed
ur gent l y. 8 9
I n one
ot her cr uci al r espect , about
whi chOf f e i s si l ent , st at e
i nt er vent i on i s
a hi ghl y
ambi guous devel opment . I t i s
t r ue, as he ar gues, t hat t he
er osi on of
possessi ve
i ndi vi dual i smt hr ough
decommodi f i ed st at e act i vi t y
hol ds out t he
pr omi se
of a soci et y emanci pat ed
f r om t he i r r at i onal i t y of
t he pr i vat e
owner shi p and cont r ol of
t he accumul at i on pr ocess .
Yet i t al so pr omi ses t he
obedi ent f or get t i ng of t he
i mage and subst ance of t he
bour geoi s i ndi vi dual -
whose r eal i sat i on
i n a r i cher , mor e concr et e f or m
Mar xhad sought - wi t hi n
an i ncr easi ngl y
r at i onal i zed, al bei t decommodi f i ed,
r eal m. By dwel l i ngon t he
st at e' s subver si on
of t he l ogi c of pr oduct i on f or
exchange, Of f e t ur ns a bl i nd
eye t o t he
f act or y- l i ke l ogi c of st at e
i nst i t ut i ons, wi t hi n whi ch i ndi vi dual s'
per sonal
ambi t i ons can onl y be r eal i sed
t hr ought he r enunci at i on of
concer n
wi t h
t hosever y st r uct ur al condi t i ons
whose r econst r uct i on i s i ndi spensi bl e
t o
t r ue
i ndi vi dual i t y . One of t he
pol i t i cal i mpl i cat i ons of Of f e' s
t hesi s, t he
st r at egi c pr i macy of
mai nt ai ni ng and ext endi ng
decommodi f i ed st at e
act i vi t i es, must
t her ef or e be t r eat ed wi t hcaut i on. As
Cast or i adi s, Haber mas
and ot her s
have poi nt ed out , t he f undament al
cont r adi ct i on wi t hi n an
i ncr easi ngl y
r at i onal i zed advancedcapi t al i smi s
i t s bur i al of t he i ndi vi dual ,
i t s
72
THELEGACYOFPOLI TI CALECONOMY
i nabi l i t y t o al l owpeopl e' s soci al
i ndi vi duat i on t hrough creat i ve " part i ci pa-
t i on" i n t he real ms of l abour and
symbol i c i nt eract i on.
2.

Acont empory t heory of
cri si s such as t hat suggest ed by Of f e must al so
probe t he f at e of pre- modern,
t radi t i on- bound component s of everyday l i f e
now under t he hei ght eni ng
pressures of rat i onal i zat i on . Thi s process of
degenerat i on was exami ned
by Marx( " al l t hat i s sol i d mel t s i nt o ai r, al l t hat i s
hol y i s prof aned" ) ,
Weber ( who, rel yi ng on Schi l l er, spoke of
t he
" di senchant ment " of
t he modern worl d) , and recogni zed bi t t erl y by
Rousseau. I ndeed, t he
i ndust ri al i zat i on of everyday l i f e began wi t h t he
f ormat i on of an
i ndust ri al prol et ari at t hrough t he f orci bl e el i mi nat i on of
peasant and art i san cul t ure
.
Of
course, t hi s sacki ng of t radi t i on was by no
means i nst ant aneous .
Tradi t i ons, upon whose remai ns bourgeoi s soci et y f ed
l i ke a predat or, were al ways a
suppl ement t o t he i deol ogy of possessi ve
i ndi vi dual i sm. I n t he l at e t went i et h
cent ury, t hese pre- modern remai ns have
al l but decomposed. The most
i mmedi at e exampl e of t hi s i s t he bl owt hat has
been deal t t o
f at al i st i c f orms of Chri st i ani t y by t he t angi bl e " successes" of
sci ent i f i c- t echni cal growt h. As Weber i ndi cat ed, t hi s i s i roni c i nasmuchas
t he
modern
nat ural sci ences have rel i gi ous root s . Cal vi ni sm' s depi ct i on of God
as
remot e
f romt he eart hl y worl d i mpl i ed t he suscept i bi l i t y of t hat
eart h t o
i nvest i gat i on, cal cul at i on and t ransf ormat i on . Not onl y has t hi s come
t o pass
but , nowadays,
t he f ormer pui ssance of rel i gi ous convi ct i on has
been
neut ral i zed by a mass
at hei smmade credi bl e by t he product i ve " wonders" of
t he sci ent i zed,
capi t al - deepened accumul at i on process . Acri t i cal account of
t hi s di senchant ment
process woul d need t o exami ne i t s uni nt ended conse-
quences, of whi ch
t here seemt o be at l east t wo. Fi rst of al l , among non-
bel i evers
t he ut opi an ( i . e . , ant i - capi t al i st rat i onal i zat i on) el ement s
of
Chri st i ani t y
st and i n danger of bei ng abandoned. Thi s i s one di st urbi ng
reason why advanced capi t al i smt ends t o devel op " t he ment al i t y
of t he l i f e
i nsurance company" ( Gunt er Grass) : sci ent i f i c- t echni cal , moral
rel at i vi st , f act
and ef f i ci ency hungry, mat eri al i st i c, de- i nt el l ect ual i zed .
Thi s " sci ent i sm" - t he uncri t i cal bel i ef i n t hat
whi ch i s sci ent i f i c - even
ent ers academi a . Wi t hi n
t he
soci al
sci ences t he t ri umph of f orms of obj ect -
i vi smi s synonymous wi t h
t he quest f or ri gour and predi ct abl e cert ai nt y, and
t ri es t o brand
di scussi ons of epi st emol ogy and t he " great soci al i ssues" as
ol d
hat 9o " Di senchant ment " processes al so have t hei r
di al ect i c wi t hi n t he
remai ni ngbodi es of organi zed Chri st i ani t y, t o
whi ch t he renewedi nt el l ect ual
i nt erest i n Chri st i an doct ri ne at t est s .
Wi t hi n t hese besi eged ci rcl es ( e. g. t he
chari smat i c movement ) , t here are
at t empt s at reconst ruct i ng t he meani ngof
st ewardshi p and sal vat i on .
Somet i mes, t hi s reconst ruct i on f ol l ows t he pat h of
soci o- pol i t i cal
act i vi sm. Pol i t i cal t heol ogy i nt ent on real i si ng i t s promi ses
i n
t hi s worl d onl y serves t o workagai nst agai nst t he
de- pol i t i ci zat i on demanded
by t he st at e' s al l ocat i ve and product i ve act i vi t i es .
73
JOHNKEANE
3 .

Al so of cr uci al
i mpor t ance i s t he ext ent of t he l i nger i ng st r engt hs of
advanced capi t al i sm' s " ci vi c cul t ur e" :
t hat ecl ect i c mi xt ur e of pr e- moder n
def er ence andor i ent at i on t o act i ve pol i t i cal
i nvol vement whi ch, bypr ovi di ng
a r eser voi r of
di f f use r egi me suppor t , def i ni t el y r ei nf or ces t he
de- pol i t i ci zat i on
of cont empor ar y
publ i c l i f e. Especi al l y i n t he Uni t ed St at es and
Br i t ai n, as
Al mond and
Ver ba' s cl assi c st udy r eveal ed, bel i ef s such as " Yes,
ci t i zens must
have r i ght s" , " t hey ought t o wat ch out f or t hei r
i nt er est s" ar e t emper ed by
" def er ence, obedi ence and humbl eness" , " Don' t get
mi xedupwi t h pol i t i cs . " 9 1
Unt i l
r ecent l y, t hi s ci vi c cul t ur e has beenr ei nf or cedby
wi despr ead at t achment
t o f ami l y andj ob ( i . e. , t o " t he chi l dr en" ,
" myhusband" , " my car eer " , et c . ) .
Of f e' s hi nt t hat t hi s ci vi c cul t ur e i s weakeni ng
needs t o be exami ned mor e
t hor oughl y. I t i s cl ear , f or exampl e, t hat
cer t ai n zones of ever yday l i f e once
consi der ed t o be r egul at ed pr oper l y by
f ami l y t r adi t i on have been subsumed
wi t hi n t he commodi t y f or m. I n t hecase of
" househol dser vi ces" , f or exampl e,
t he pr i vat i smof f ami l y l i f e i s now
bombar ded by a pl et hor a of mar ket abl e
ser vi ces: i dent i cal ser vi ngs of f r i ed chi cken
andf r ozen f oods; t he pr ovi si on of
school i ng; " car e" f or t he young, agedand si ck ;
dr ycl eani ng and l aundr y; t he
st eady
hand of t he " hel pi ng pr of essi ons" .
Whi l e t he f or mof f ami l y l i f e
r emai ns, i t s cont ent t ends t o be r emoved.
Thi s r esul t s not onl y i n t he f ami l y' s
gr owi ng dependence on
var i ous out si de agenci es, but al so i n somequest i oni ng
of monogamous
het er osexual i t y, a t empor ar y r i se i n t he
l evel of i nt er -
gener at i onal conf l i ct ,
an ever - ear l i er at t ai nment of puber t y
and sexual
exper i ence, and
concer n over " gr owi ng ol d" . Whet her
t hi s di si nt egr at i on of
t he pr i vat i sm
of t he ci vi c cul t ur e i s accel er at ed by
" i nt r usi ve" st at e pl anni ng
al so must be pr obed.
For i t i s cl ear t hat sexual di scr i mi nat i on, poor
qual i t y or
dependency- i nduci ng
heal t h car e, andt he qual i t y and
scope of educat i onno
l onger , can be seen as havi ng nat ur al or i gi ns,
whose consequences must be
suf f er ed pr i vat el y. Thr ough t hei r pol i t i ci zat i on,
i ncumbent admi ni st r at i ons
maybe hel d account abl e. The
cur r ent assaul t uponpat r i ar chal f ami l yl i f e and
nat ur al modes of chi l d- r ai si ng,
and f emi ni st at t empt s at gener at i ng a
new
i dent i t y
ar ei mpor t ant sympt oms of t hi s pr ocess . Not onl ydo such
movement s
pr omot e a wi der awar eness of t he cont i ngency of
t he cont ent s of t r adi t i ons;
even t hef or mof t he pr ocess of symbol i c
i nt er - act i on i t sel f cancomet o beseen
as cont i ngent and al t er abl e.
Pr esumabl y, t he l at t er ent ai l s wi despr eadpubl i c
di scussi on whi ch, as Of f e has i ndi cat ed,
i s anat hema t o t hesi l ence uponwhi ch
t he cl ass- pol i t i cal syst emof
advanced capi t al i smt hr i ves.
4.

Fi nal l y, t her e i s t he quest i on of t he
cr i t i cal , de- l egi t i mat i ng pot ent i al of
ar t . I t i s i mmedi at el y evi dent t hat ,
hel d capt i ve by i t s pol i t i cal
economy, one
Mar xi st t r adi t i on ( f r om
Kaut sky and Pl ekhanov t o
cont empor ar y f or ms of
soci al i st r eal i sm)
has deal t wi t h t hi s quest i on t hr ough
a spur i ous soci ol ogi cal
r educt i oni sm
. The pr obl emof an
emanci pat or y aest het i c has been col l apsed
i nt o
concer n wi t h t he cl ass or i gi ns
and pr opaganda val ue of
cer t ai n f or ms of
74
THELEGACYOFPOLI TI CAL
ECONOMY
ar t
. Thi s has occl uded
t he equal l y evi dent f act t hat much so- cal l ed
"bour geoi s" ar t has been char act er i zed by
i ssui ng i ndi ct ment s agai nst t he
wor l d as i t i s, by i t s st r uggl e t o
br i ng t he bour geoi s wor l d
t o
i t s senses .
Bohemi ani smi s t he cl assi c ni net eent h
cent ur y exampl e of t hi s aut onomy of
ar t
t r ansf i gur ed i nt o pr ot est agai nst
t he sacr i f i ces of l i ber al capi t al i sm. The
second
gener at i on boheme
(Ri mbaud, Cor bi er e) f r equent ed beer - hal l s,
separ at ed t hemsel ves f r omt he r epr essi on
and conspi cuous consumpt i on of
bour geoi s l i f e and, havi ng been r ai sed i n t he homes of t he bour geoi si e,
l at er
became a ci r cl e of wander i ng, anar chi c vagabonds and out l aws dedi cat ed t o
t he over t hr owof t hei r f at her s' soci et y . Si mi l ar l y, "L' ar t pour f ar t " war ned
t hat ar t i t sel f coul d be i mpr i soned wi t hi n t he commodi t y f or m, consumed by
t he cr eepi ng r at i onal i zat i on of i ndust r i al capi t al i sm. The ext ent of t hi s
pr ot est - pot ent i al i n t he l at e t went i et h cent ur y needs t o be r e- exami ned. Thi s
need i s st r engt hened by
t he col l apse
of t he gapbet ween ar t
and
ever yday l i f e
under
t he
i mpact of mechani zat i on and
t echni cal i nvent i on
(t he
r adi o,
mi cr ophone, ci nema) . Whi l e f or some (e. g. Or t ega y Gasset , T. S. El i ot ) t hi s
her al ded t he dest r uct i on of al l ar t by mass vul gar i t y, f or ot her s (Benj ami n, f or
exampl e) t he r esul t i ng l oss of t he "aur a" of ar t was t o be t he newbasi s f or a
t r ul y r evol ut i onar y and col l ect i ve pr oduct i on and r ecept i on of ar t . Agai nst
t hi s, Ador nospoke of t he danger s of t he r at i onal i zat i on of cul t ur al l i f e vi a an
emer gent cul t ur e i ndust r y, whi ch sei zes t he cr umbl i ng"aur a" of hi gh ar t onl y
t o r epr oduce i t t hr ough manuf act ur ed st ar dom and pr ogr ammed
sensat i onal i sm. Thi s di st ur bi ng devel opment l ed Ador no t o pr osel yt i ze on
behal f of negat i ve ar t (e. g. , t he wor ks of Samuel Becket t and Ar nol d
Schoenber g) . The r at i onal i zat i on of ar t was seen t o r esul t i n a cr i si s of t hat
whi ch was consi der ed t o be "beaut i f ul "
.
9 z
Thi s ki nd of debat e i s i mpor t ant ,
i nasmuch as i t spel l s out bot h t he possi bi l i t y, and uni nt endedconsequences, of
aut onomous ar t degener at i ng i nt o mani pul at i ve, publ i c pr opaganda . For i t i s
cl ear t hat t he
admi ni st r at i ve pr oduct i on
of cul t ur e i s nowadays a cont r adi c-
t or y pr ocess . Manuf act ur ed symbol s t end t o become det ached f r omt he
ever yday l i f e wor l d of t hei r consumer s, t hus r esul t i ng i n anensembl e of si gnal s
whi ch ar e di f f i cul t t o i nt er r ogat e . Wi t hi n t hi s f i el d of si gnal s, t he passi ve
consumer s f i nd i t di f f i cul t t o r ecogni ze
t hemsel ves and t o ar t i cul at e and sat i sf y
t hei r needs. Thi s i s why t he cul t ur e i ndust r y pr eci pi t at es count er - cul t ur es bent
on
r e- est abl i shi ng
meani ng
and i nt el l i gi bi l i t y
wi t hi n t he r eal m
of symbol i c
i nt er act i on.
Pol i t i cal Economy and Pol i t i cal Li f e
C. B. Macpher son has suggest ed r ecent l y t hat a t heor y of t he advanced
capi t al i st st at e must at some poi nt r e- f ocus t hose quest i ons about essent i al l y
75
JOHN
KEANE
humanpur poses andcapaci t i es whi chwer e
cent r al t o t heor i es of t he st at e i n
t he
gr andt r adi t i on. 9 3 The above ment i oned t hemes, and
t he mor e gener al cal l
f or a
cr i t i cal under st andi ng of t he l ogi c of advanced
capi t al i sm' s symbol i c
i nt er at i on, poi nt i n t hi s di r ect i on. They l ead di r ect l y t o a
r econsi der at i on of
t he cl assi cal
meani ng of pol i t i cal l i f e. Thi s sur pr i si ng t ur ni n our
ar gument
agai nst Of f e i s wel l
i l l ust r at ed i n t he Ar i st ot el ean f or mul aof manas zoon
pol i t i kon.
For Ar i st ot l e, manhas t he capaci t y f or convi vi al
associ at i onwi t hi n
t he
pol i s . By cont r ast wi t h
t he ani mal - l i ke "nat ur al ness" of t he
domai nof
necessi t y and
t oi l ( t he "mer e l i f e" of money- maki ng, sl aver y, cr af t smanshi p
and chi l d- bear i ng) ,
ci t i zens canbe r ebor nwi t hi nand t hr ought he i nf or med
i nt er - subj ect i vi t y of bi ospol i t i kos.
Her et he meani ngs of symbol i c i nt er act i on
and pol i t i cs
conver ge. Pol i t i cal l i f e i s t he domai n i n whi ch t he
human
capaci t i es f or act i on and
speechar e i nt er wovencl osel y, a r eal mof publ i c
act i vi t y i nwhi chspeaki ng
and act i ng i ndi vi dual s canbe seenandhear d and
t ake one anot her
ser i ousl y. I ndeed, speaki ng i s her e under st oodas af or m
of
pr axi s : mani s a l i vi ng
bei ng capabl e of speech. Accor di ng t o Ar i st ot l e,
t he
r eal mof
pol i t i cs i s t her ef or e t he domai n of pot ent i al f r eedom.
Thr ough
symbol i c i nt er act i on,
humans not onl y ar t i cul at e t hei r i nt er dependency
( l anguage,
af t er al l , i s no pr i vat e, sol i t ar y
af f ai r )
.
They al so come t o
i ndi vi duat e t hemsel ves i nsof ar as t hey l ear nt o
speak andact f or t hemsel ves;
pol i t i cal act i vi t y i s amode of sel f - di scl osur e
t hr ough t he appr opr i at i on of
communi cat i vel y- pr oduced "sense"
. I t i s vi a pol i t i cal act i vi t y, t hen,
t hat
humans' t r uei ndi vi dual i t y
canf l ower wi t hi nt he shel l of soci al
r esponsi bi l i t y.
Thi s i s why t o engage
i n ar t i cul at e pr axi s means t o choose
del i ber at el y
bet weencompet i ng means andends,
"t o t ake t he l ead" . Pol i t i cs, accor di ng Co
Ar i st ot l e, usher s i n t he possi bi l i t y of
pr act i cal wi sdomand mor al vi r t ue:
"mor al vi r t ue i s a st at e of char act er
concer ned wi t hchoi ce, and choi ce i s
del i ber at e desi r e . .
. "9 4
To
seek mor al vi r t ue i s t her ef or e t o admi t
of t he
possi bi l i t y of human
af f ai r s unconst r ai ned by bl i nd necessi t y.
Thi s possi bi l i t y
i s capt ur ed
byAr i st ot l e' s descr i pt i on of humans as
pol i t i cal ani mal s : l i t er al l y,
we
ar e caught bet weent he ani mal s and t he gods.
We have seen
above t hat t he emer gence and
mat ur at i on of bour geoi s
moder ni t y was synonymous wi t ht he
col l apseanddest r uct i onof t he
doct r i ne
of pol i t i cs whi chconcer ned
aj ust andconvi vi al l i f e andt he
associ at ednot i on
of manas zoon
pol i t i kon, whose uni que capaci t i es
ar e r eal i sed vi a sel f -
consci ous
speech and act i on. 9 5 Fr omt he st and- poi nt
of t he anci ent s,
bour geoi s
t hi nker s f r omMachi avel l i t hr ough
t he Engl i shut i l i t ar i ans canbe
seent o have char t ed a sel f - cont r adi ct or y
cour se t owar d at echni cal
pol i t i cs,
whose ai mwas t he
admi ni st r at i on of meni n accor dance
wi t ht he l ogi c of
Gal i l eansci ence' s
at t empt ed subj ugat i onof nat ur e. Fr om
i t s cl assi cal concer n
wi t ht he good
and exempl ar y l i f e of speechand
act i on, pol i t i cs became t he
l i mi t ed t echni que
of r epr oduci ng ci vi l soci et y by
or gani zi ng and depl oyi ng
76
THELEGACYOFPOLI TI CAL
ECONOMY
cunni ng, appear ance, moneyand men. Wi th good r eason, Mar xther ef or e
spoke of " pol i ti cs" as synonymous wi th author i tar i an r ul e,
ensl avement,
r epr essi on. " Pol i ti cal power , pr oper l y so- cal l ed" , Mar x. and Engel s r emar ked
i n the Mani f esto, " i s mer el ythe or gani zed power of one cl ass f or oppr essi ng
another . "
96
I t goes wi thout sayi ng that thi s di ssol uti on of the theor yand
pr acti ce of the
anci ent meani ng of pol i ti cs was contested bi tter l y. Wi th the
post- Kanti an
concer n wi th pr acti cal r eason, the pr omi se of pol i ti cal l i f e, of a
cr i ti cal
publ i c
dedi cated tothe sear ch f or r ati onal uni ver sal s, was onceagai nposi ted agai nst
the bour geoi s f eti shi smof l abour and r ei f i cati on of pol i ti cs . Labour ver sus
pol i ti cs, ci vi l soci ety ver sus the state: thei r attempted medi ati on was
i l l ustr ated dr amati cal l yi n Hegel ' s di scussi onof the master - sl ave di al ecti c . The
sel f - f or mati on of Spi r i t pr oceeds thr ough symbol i cal l y- medi ated l abour and
the str uggl e f or mutual r ecogni ti on. The one- si ded, consci ous r ecogni ti on of
the Lor d bythe Bondsmani s over tur ned bythe Bondsman' s ascendancyover
natur e,
a consci ous ascendance
acqui r ed one- si dedl ythr oughl abour . 97 I t i s thi s
scenar i o whi ch was i nher i ted by the Young Hegel i ans and tr ansf or med
r adi cal l ybyMar x. 98 Thr oughan expl anati on of sensuous l abour as the pr i me
mover of hi stor y, Mar xsought todr awout the possi bi l i ti es i nher i ng wi thi n
the l i ber al capi tal i st contr adi cti on between the f or ces of pr oducti on
( accumul ated thr ough soci al l abour ) and the r el ati ons of pr oducti on ( or , the
ensembl e of symbol i c i nter acti on whi ch had l ar gel y taken on an economi c
f or m) . Mar xther ebydemonstr atedthat the emer gent, sel f - consci ous str uggl e
of pr ol etar i ans tor e- appr opr i ate thei r congeal ed andl i vi ng power s of l abour
f or eshadowed a r evol uti onar ydi ssol uti on of the
anonymous, " de- pol i ti ci zed"
r el ati ons of mar ket l i f e. The spectr e of pol i ti cs came to haunt the moder n
wor l d
. Cl ass agi tati on, educati on, or gani zati on, sel f - consci ous speech and
acti on thr eatened
the
l ogi c accor di ng
to
whi ch bour geoi s soci ety
was
or gani zed. Def i ned bythei r obj ecti ve condi ti ons of l abour , even pr ol etar i ans
came toseek emanci pati on thr ough sel f - knowl edge, del i ber ati on, speech and
acti on.
99
Of f e has demonstr ated power f ul l y why thi s model of the " conf l uence" of
l abour and symbol i c i nter acti on, cl ass and pol i ti cs
i s nowobsol ete wi thout
escapi ng i ts
l egacy. Wi thi n the mi l i eu of advanced capi tal i sm, and an ol d
pol i ti cal economy subj ect tothe newdi f f i cul ti es
to
whi ch
Of f e has poi nted,
cr i ti cal theor ymust nowmoveagai nst bothto" i nter nal i ze" the pr obl emof the
pr oducti on
and r epr oduti on of symbol i c i nter acti on. Cer tai nl y, the ol d
Mar xi an f or mul a - " a cer tai n mode of
pr oducti on . . . i s al ways combi ned
wi th a cer tai n mode of co- oper ati on or soci al
stage" 1 0 0 - conti nues tobe an
i nci si ve poi nt of depar tur e. Yet pol i ti cal economy' s r educti on of thi s " cer tai n
mode of co- oper ati on" to mar ket r el ati ons of pr oducti on can no l onger be
j usti f i ed. Ther ecaptur i ng of the di al ecti c
of l abour andsymbol i c i nter acti on at
7 7
JOHNKEANE
t he cat egor i cal l evel can nowonl y pr oceed on t he basi s of an enr i ched or
deepened
under st andi ng of l abour . 1 0 1 Fr omt he goal of
unf et t er ed pr oduct i ve
f or ces t o t hat of unf et t er ed l abour andsymbol i c i nt er act i on: t hi s i s what now
menaces
pol i t i cal economy and t he aut hor i t ar i an st at e
of advanced
capi t al i sm.
Pol i t i cal Economy
Uni ver si t y of Tor ont o
For t hei r comment s onanearl i er draf t of t hi sessay,
I woul d l i ke t ot hank Phi l l i p Hansen, Pat ri ck
Pat t erson and Davi d Wol f e .
1 .

For exampl e, t he now
wel l - known comment s on t he st at e, economy and l i beral i sm, as
report ed i n The Gl obe and
Mai l , Toront o: J anuary 8, 1 976, p. 7 .
2.

Capi t al , 1 , Moscow: 1 971 , p. 264, not e 3 .
3 . Sparked i ni t i al l y by t he si mul t aneous publ i cat i on of
Ral ph Mi l i band' s The St at e i n
Capi t al i st Soci et y, London: 1 969, and
Ni cos Poul ant zas' Pouvoi r Pol i t i que et Cl asses
Soci al es, Pari s: 1 968, Engl i sh edi t i on 1 973, t hi s debat e
unf ol ded i nt he col umns of New
Lef t
Revi ew. See Poul ant zas, "The Probl emof
t he Capi t al i st St at e", NewLef t Revi ew, 58,
November- December,
1 969 and "The Capi t al i st St at e : ARepl y t o Mi l i band and Lacl au" .
i bi d. , 95, J anuary- February, 1 976, and Mi l i band,
"The Capi t al i st St at e - Repl y t o Ni cos
Poul ant zas", i bi d. , 59, J anuary- February, 1 970 and "Poul ant zas
and t he Capi t al i st St at e",
i bi d. , 82,
November- December, 1 973 . More general l y, cf. Poul ant zas,
Fasci smand
Di ct at orshi p, London: 1 974, Cl asses i n Cont emporary
Capi t al i sm, London: 1 975, LaCri se
des Di ct at ures: Port ugal , Grece, Espagne, Pari s:
1 975, and Mi l i band, "Ont he Marxi st
Theory of t he St at e", Arena, 39, 1 975 and
Marxi smand Pol i t i cs, Oxf ord: 1 977.
4.

For exampl e,
Leni n' s St at e and Revol ut i on; some l i mi t ed and i nsuf f i ci ent l y coherent t hemes
i n Gramsci
; Trot sky' s t heory of t he degenerat e workers' st at e ; Sweezy' s crude vi ewof
t he
st at e as a mere
i nst rument of t he rul i ng bourgeoi s cl ass; et c.
5 .
THELEGACYOF
POLI TI CALECONOMY
Not es
For some di scussi onof
Marx' s pl ans see Mart i nNi col aus' "Foreword" t oMarx, Grundri sse
Harmondswort h : 1 973, p.
54. Not e t hat as earl y as hi s arri val i nBrussel s i n 1 845, Marx had
hoped t o pursue
t he t hemes of hi s Cri t i que of Hel gel ' s Phi l osophy of Ri ght and On
t he
J ewi sh
Quest i onvi a a more det ai l ed cri t i que of t he l i beral st at e - see hi s
"Poi nt s ont he
ModernSt at e and Ci vi l Soci et y" i nL. East onand K. H. Guddat ,
eds. , Wri t i ngs of t he Young
Marx on Phi l osophy and Soci et y, NewYork : 1 967, pp.
399- 400.
6.

Pol i t i cal Power and Soci al Cl asses, op
.
ci t
. ,
especi al l y part
i v, Sect i on 1 , and "The Probl em
of t he Capi t al i st St at e", op. ci t . , p .
74. No t ext ual evi dence i s advanced f or t hi s
i nt erpret at i on,
whi ch
i s
act ual l y f ounded on Engel s' comment t o Marx ( 1 3 Apri l , 1 867) i n
Marx and Engel s, Sel ect ed Correspondence, Moscow: 1 965, p . 1 77.
7 . Mi l i band,
"Marx and t he St at e", The Soci al i st Regi st er, NewYork : 1 965, pp. 278- 9,
Marxi smand Pol i t i cs, op. ci t . , pp. 1 - 1 5, and "Poul ant zas and t he Capi t al i st St at e", op
. ci t
. ,
where Marx and Engel s' assert i ont hat "t he modernSt at e i s but acommi t t ee
f or managi ng
t he commonaf f ai rs of t he whol e bourgeoi si e" i s t aken t o meant hat "t he
not i on of common
af f ai rs assumes t he exi st ence of part i cul ar ones; and t he not i on of
t he whol e
bourgeoi si e
i mpl i es t he exi st ence of separat e el ement s
whi ch make
up
t hat whol e . Thi s bei ng t he case,
t here i s an obvi ous need
f or
an
i nst i t ut i onof t he ki nd t hey ref er t o, namel y t he st at e ; and t he
st at e cannot
meet t hi s need wi t hout enj oyi ng a cert ai ndegree of aut onomy . I not her words,
t he
not i on
of aut onomy i s embedded i n t he def i ni t i on i t sel f , i s an i nst ri nsi c part of i t . "
8 . E. Al t vat er, "Some Probl ems of St at e I nt ervent i oni sm", i n
J ohn Hol l oway and Sol
Pi cci ot t o, eds. , St at e and Capi t al : AMarxi st Debat e,
London: 1 978.
9 .

Mauri ce Merl eau- Pont y, I n Prai se of Phi l osophy, t rans
.
J ohn
Wi l d and J ames Edi e,
Evanst on: 1 963, p. 41 .
79
JOHNKEANE
10.

Here we can el i de several rel at ed, but separat e, expl anat ory di f f i cul t i es
over whi ch t hi s
ret reat i smst umbl es . Fi rst , t herei s t he probl emof t he
st at e i n pre- capi t al i st soci et i es and, i n .
part i cul ar, t he emergence of a rei f i ed set
of st at e i nst i t ut i ons f romki nshi p syst ems . Engel s'
vi ew( i n The Ori gi n of t he Fami l y, Pri vat e Propert y,
and t he St at e) t hat t he emergence of
cl asses out of pri mi t i ve communi st soci al f ormat i ons cal l ed f or an i nt egrat i ng st at e
apparat us i s i ncorrect . Cl ass soci et i es onl y
arose wi t hi n t he f ramework of a di st i nct i ve
pol i t i cal syst em, t hat i s, wi t hi n t he bounds of a col l ect i ve
i dent i t y no l onger embodi ed wi t hi n
t he f i gure of a common ancest or
but , rat her, i n t hat of a common rul er . See Marshal l
Sahl i ns, " Pol i t i cal Power and t he
Economy i n Pri mi t i ve Soci et y" , i n G. E. Dol e and R. L .
Carnei ro,
eds . , Essays i n t he Sci ence of Cul t ure, NewYork: 1960; Lawrence Krader,
Format i on of t he
St at e, Engl ewood Cl i f f s: 1968 and E. R. Servi ce, Ori gi ns of t he St at eand
Ci vi l i zat i on, NewYork: 1975. Secondl y, t here remai ns t he naggi ng probl emof St al i ni sm,
whi ch
must beunderst ood as a process of st at e- bui l di ng - ut i l i zi ng t error and l egi t i mat ed by
t he symbol s of Sovi et Marxi sm- so as t o bri ng about a propert y t ransf er, t hat i s, f rom
pri vat e propert y t o col l ect i vi zed propert y, where t he surrogat e of t he col l ect i ve group t o
whomt he propert y i s t ransf erred i s t he st at e. I n at t empt i ng an expl anat i on of t hi s st at i st
domi nat i on, hi st ori cal mat eri al i smi n i t s ret reat i st f orms f unct i ons as an i deol ogy
i n t he
st rong sense of t hat t erm: i t i nvokes f i ct i ve ent i t i es and pseudo- rat i onal , abst ract const ruct s
( " degenerat e workers' st at e" , " cri mes agai nst soci al i st l egal i t y" , " st at e capi t al i sm" ,
" St al i ni st devi at i oni sm" , et c . ) whi ch, i nt ended or not , j ust i f y and hi de a soci o- hi st ori cal
pract i ce whose t rue l ogi c i s ot herwi se.
11.

" Pol i t i cal Aut hori t y and
Cl ass St ruct ures - An Anal ysi s of Lat e Capi t al i st Soci et i es" ,
I nt ernat i onal Journal or Soci ol ogy, vol . 2, 1 ( 1972) , p . 79; cf . i bi d. , p. 98 and " TheTheory of
t he Capi t al i st St at eand t he Probl emof Pol i cy Format i on" , i n L .
Li ndberg et . al . , St ress and
Cont radi ct i on i n Modern Capi t al i sm, Lexi ngt on: 1975,
p
. 125.
Lament abl y, Of f e' s work i s
not known wi del y i n t he Engl i sh- speaki ng worl d. The f ol l owi ng i nt erpret at i on
of hi s
wri t i ngs i s an at t empt at overcomi ng t he many i nadequaci es i n t hecomment ari es by
S
.
Sardei - Bi ermann et . al . , " Cl ass Domi nat i on and t he Pol i t i cal Syst em: ACri t i cal
I nt erpret at i on of Recent Cont ri but i ons by Cl aus Of f e" , Kapi t al i st at e, 2, 1973 and Davi d A.
Gol d et . al . , " Recent Devel opment s i n Marxi st Theori es of t he Capi t al i st St at e" ,
Mont hl y
Revi ew, vol . 27, 5- 6, Oct ober- November, 1975.
12.

Cf . Franz Neumann, " Economi cs and Pol i t i cs i n t he Twent i et h Cent ury" i n TheDemocrat i c
and t he Aut hori t ari an St at e, Herbert Marcuse, ed . , Gl encoe: 1957, pp. 257- 269. I n hi s The
Great Transf ormat i on, Bost on: 1957, Karl Pol anyi has argued t hat ni net eent h cent ury
ci vi l i sat i on rest ed on f our i nst i t ut i ons : t he bal ance- of - power syst em of i nt ernat i onal
rel at i ons, whi ch f aci l i t at ed a cent ury of rel at i ve
i nt ernat i onal order and st abi l i t y; t he " weak"
l i beral st at e; t he i nt ernat i onal gol d st andard
; and ( det ermi ni ng t hese devel opment s) t he
t ri umphant ri se of t he sel f - regul at i ng market ; cf . al so hi s comment i n
George Dal t on, ed . ,
Pri mi t i ve, Archai c and Modern Economi es : Essays of
Karl Pol anyi , Bost on: 1971, p. 65 -
" Man' s economy i s, as a rul e, submerged i n hi s soci al rel at i ons . The changef romt hi s t o a
soci et y whi chwas, on t hecont rary, submerged i n t he economi c syst emwas
an
ent i rel y novel
devel opment . " Accordi ngt o Wol i n' s Pol i t i cs and Vi si on, Bost on: 1960, t hel i beral t radi t i on
was synonymous wi t h t he shri nki ng of t he sphere of pol i t i cs and t he " gl ori f i cat i on of
soci et y" ; Carol e Pat eman has correct ed someof t he l at t er' s ambi gui t i es i n " Subl i mat i onand
Rei f i cat i on: Locke,
Wol i n and t heLi beral Democrat i c Concept i onof t he Pol i t i cal " , Pol i t i cs
and Soci et y,
1975.
13.

HereOf f e' s account of t he i deol ogy of t he " achi evi ng soci et y" i s ext remel y generous t oward
Marx:
cf. I ndust ry and
I nequal i t y, London: 1976, whi chi s at ransl at i on of Lei st ungspri nzi p
andi ndust ri el l e Arbei t , Frankf urt amMai n: 1970. Nodoubt , t he pot ency of ot her f orms of
symbol i c i nt eract i on ( pat ri archy,
rel i gi ous t radi t i on, nat i onal i sm) shoul d not be
underest i mat ed
.
80
THELEGACYOFPOLITICALECONOMY
14.

Immanuel Wal l er st ei n ar gues t hat t he si xt eent h cent ur y wi t nessed t he r i se of a capi t al i st
wor l d economy f ounded on bot h an i nt er nat i onal di vi si on of l abour and a bur eaucr at i c
st at e; cf. The Moder n Wor l d Syst em, NewYor k: 1974. See al so t hewor k by B. E. Suppl e,
Commer ci al Cr i si s and Changei n Engl and 1600- 1642, Cambr i dge: 1959, especi al l y chapt er
10, f or a di scussi on of st at e- i ni t i at ed at t empt s t oover comet he i nst abi l i t y of t he
emer gi ng
mar ket economy dur i ng t hi s per i od.
15 .

The 1832 Ref or mBi l l was
especi al l y cr uci al , i nasmuch as i t can beseen as t he MagnaCar t a
of t he Engl i sh mi ddl e cl ass mar ket eer s,
t he pol i t i cal r ef or ms whi ch cr owned t he f i r st
Indust r i al Revol ut i on. It was sympt omat i c
of t hat wave of i nt er nat i onal l i ber al
r evol ut i oni smbet ween 1829- 34 whi ch ef f ect ed t he Fr ench J ul y Revol ut i on
of
1830,
t he
J acksoni aner a i n Amer i ca, upr i si ngs
i n Bel gi um
( 1830) ,
Pol and ( 1830- 1) , and di st ur bances
i n It al y, Ger many, Swi t zer l and, Ir el and, Spai nand Por t ugal ; cf. E. J . Hobsbawn, TheAgeof
Revol ut i on 1789- 1848, NewYor k and Tor ont o: 1962, especi al l y chs . 3, 6.
16.

" Pr i nci pl es of t heCi vi l Code" , par t I, ch. 2 i nJ . Bent ham, The Theor y of Legi sl at i on, C.
K.
Ogden, ed. , London: 1931, p . 96.
17.

Ibi d. , par t 1, ch. 11, p . 119. J ames Mi l l , af t er cr i t i ci zi ng t he cont ent i ons t hat t he end of
gover nment i s " t hepubl i c good" ( Locke) or " t hegr eat est happi ness of t hegr eat est number " ,
r epeat ed an ar gument i dent i cal wi t h t hat of Bent ham: " . . . i t i s obvi ous t hat ever y manwho
has not al l t he obj ect s of hi s desi r e has i nducement t o t ake t hemf r omany ot her man
who
i s
weaker t han hi msel f : and howi s he t o bepr event ed? Onemodei s suf f i ci ent l y obvi ous,
and i t
does not appear t hat t her ei s any ot her : t heuni on of acer t ai nnumber of
ment opr ot ect one
anot her
.
The obj ect ,
i t
i s pl ai n, can best be
at t ai ned whenagr eat number of mencombi ne
and del egat e t o a smal l number t he power necessar y f or pr ot ect i ng t hemal l . Thi s i s
gover nment "
; An Essay
on
Gover nment , I . V. Shi el ds, ed. , Indi anapol i s : 1955, pp . 49- 50.
18.

Capi t al , I, op. ci t . , par t 1,
ch
. I, sect i on 2; Kar l Mar x, ACont r i but i ont o t he Cr i t i que of
Pol i t i cal Economy,
Moscow: 1970,
ch.
I ; and
Gr undr i sse, Har mondswor t h: 1973, pp . 881- 2.
19.

MEW, xxi i i , p . 447Quot ed i nRober t
C.
Tucker , " Mar x as a Pol i t i cal Theor i st " , i nNi chol as
Lobkowi cz ed. , Mar x and t he West er n Wor l d, Not r e Dame: 1967, pp . 126.
20.

" Pol i t i cal Aut hor i t y" , op. ci t . , p . 80.
21 .

" Pr ef ace t o a Cont r i but i on t o t he Cr i t i que of Pol i t i cal
Economy" i n Mar x and Engel s,
Sel ect ed Wor ks, I, Moscow: 1969, pp
.
502- 506. Not et hat t hi s i s al most exact l y
copi ed f r om
t he much
ear l i er f or mul at i onof
The Ger man
Ideol ogy ( East onand Guddat , op. ci t . , p . 469) :
" The t er m` ci vi l soci et y' emer ged i n t he ei ght eent h cent ur y whenpr oper t y r el at i ons had
al r eady evol ved f r omt he communi t y of ant i qui t y and medi eval t i mes . Ci vi l soci et y as such
onl y devel ops wi t h t hebour geoi s. Thesoci al or gani zat i on, however , whi ch evol ves di r ect l y
f r ompr oduct i onand commer ceand i nal l ages f or ms t he basi s of t hest at eand t her est of t he
i deal i st i c super st r uct ur e has al ways been desi gnat ed by t he same name. "
22.

" Cr i t i que of Hegel ' s Phi l osophy of t he St at e ( 1843) " , East on and Guddat , op . ci t . , pp.
151- 202
.
23.

Ibi d. , p . 176: " The abst r act i onof t hest at eas such bel ongs onl y t omoder nt i mes becauset he
abst r act i on of pr i vat e l i f e bel ongs onl y t ot heset i mes . Theabst r act i onof t hepol i t i cal st at ei s
a moder n
pr oduct . " Wi t h r ef er ence t o t he Fr ench and Amer i canRevol ut i ons and agai nst
Bauer , Mar x r epeat s
t hi s t heme of t he depol i t i ci zat i on of r el at i ons of exchange i n ci vi l
soci et y: " The ol d ci vi l soci et y ( f eudal i sm) had a di r ect l y pol i t i cal char act er , t hat i s, t he
el ement s of ci vi l l i f e such as pr oper t y, t he f ami l y, t he mode and manner of wor k, f or
exampl e, wer e r ai sed i nt o el ement s of pol i t i cal l i f e i nt hef or mof l andl or di sm, est at es, and
26.

East on
and Guddat , op. c i t . , p. 470.
JOHNKEANE
c or por at i ons . . . Thet hr owi ng of f of t hepol i t i c al yokewas at
t hesamet i met het hr owi ng of f
of t he bondt hat had f et t er ed t heegoi st i c spi r i t of c i vi l soc i et y. Pol i t i c al
emanc i pat i on was at
t he samet i me t he emanc i pat i on of c i vi l soc i et y f r ompol i t i c s, f r omt he appear anc e
of a
gener al c ont ent " ; "On t he Jewi sh Quest i on", i bi d. , pp. 238- 9.
24.

I bi d. , p. 185; c f . "Ont heJewi shQuest i on", p. 225, wher eMar xnot es t hat t hebour geoi s
st at e
"st ands i n t hesameopposi t i on t o c i vi l soc i et y and goes beyondi t i n t hesameway as r el i gi on
goes beyondt he l i mi t at i on of t hepr of anewor l d, t hat i s, by r ec ogni zi ng, r e- est abl i shi ngand
nec essar i l y al l owi ng i t sel f t o be domi nat ed
by
i t " ( emphasi s mi ne) .
25.

"Cr i t i c al Not es on' The Ki ngof Pr ussi a and Soc i al Ref or m' ( 1844) ", i bi d. , p. 349;
c f Mar x' s
pol emi c al di sc ussi on of t he Fr enc hRevol ut i on i n The Hol y Fami l y, or Cr i t i queof Cr i t i c al
Cr i t i c i sm, Mosc ow: 1975, pp. 142- 3.
27.

Not e t hat , under t hi s f or mul at i on, i t i s qui t e c onc ei vabl e t hat t hose
who ac t ual l y st af f t he
st at e i nst i t ut i ons may not be t he ec onomi c al l y and c ul t ur al l y
domi nant c l ass . Mar x
ment i ons t hi s possi bi l i t y wi t h r ef er enc e t o t he Engl i sh Whi gs ( "t he
ar i st oc r at i c
r epr esent at i ve of t he bour geoi s") i n "The El ec t i ons i n Engl and - Tor i es and
Whi gs" i n
Mar xand Engel s, Ar t i c l es on
Br i t ai n, Mosc ow: 1971, p. 112.
28.

"Mani f est o of t heCommuni st
Par t y", i n Mar xandEngel s, Sel ec t ed
Wor ks, 1, op. c i t . , pp.
110- 111; c f . Capi t al , I , op.
c i t . , p. 703, wher eMar xnot es t hat "t he
power of t heSt at e" i s "t he
c onc ent r at ed and or gani zed f or c e of
soc i et y", and Gr undr i sse, op. c i t . p. 72:
"pol i t i c al
c ondi t i ons ar eonl y t heof f i c i al expr essi on
of c i vi l soc i et y . . . Legi sl at i on, whet her
pol i t i c al or
c i vi l , never does mor et han pr oc l ai m,
expr ess i n wor ds, t he wi l l of ec onomi c
r el at i ons . "
29.

"The Ger man I deol ogy", East on and
Guddat , op. c i t . , p. 470: "Theper f ec t exampl e
of t he
moder n st at e i s Nor t h
Amer i c a. The moder n Fr enc h, Engl i sh, and
Amer i c an wr i t er s al l
expr ess t he opi ni on t hat t he st at e
exi st s onl y f or t he sake of pr i vat e
pr oper t y; t hi s f ac t has
ent er ed i nt o t he
c onsc i ousness of t he or di nar y man. "
Compar et he c r i t i c al di sc ussi on of
Car ey, Bast i at and t he Uni t ed
St at es i n Gr undr i sse, op. c i t . , pp. 884- 9.
30.

Gr undr i sse, c p. c i t . , pp. 471- 9; "The
Ger man I deol ogy" i n East on and
Guddat , ep. c i t . , p.
470; "The 18t h Br umai r eof Loui s
Bonapar t e" i n Mar xandEngel s,
Sel ec t edWor ks, I , op.
c i t . , pp. 394- 487; "TheCi vi l
War i n Fr anc e", i bi d. , p. 219. Mar x' s
di sc ussi on of t heEngl i sh
Fac t or y Ac t s ( i n
Capi t al , 1, c p. c i t . , pp. 222- 286) i s
anot her exampl eof t hi s exc ept i onal i sm.
31.

"Mani f est o of
t he Communi st Par t y", c p. c i t . , p. 113.
32.

"Ec onomi c and Phi l osophi c Manusc r i pt s
( 1844) ", i n East on and Guddat , op. c i t . , p.
299
.
33
.

Most r ec ent l y on t hi s poi nt , see Jur gen Haber mas,
Knowl edge and Human I nt er est s,
London: 1972 and Zur Rekonst r ukt i on
des Hi st or i sc hen Mat er i al i smus,
Fr ankf ur t am
Mai n: 1976; Jean Baudr i l l ar d, The
Mi r r or of Pr oduc t i on, St . Loui s : 1975; Hannah
Ar endt ,
The Human Condi t i on, Chi c ago: 1974
; Al f r ed Sc hmi dt , The Conc ept of Nat ur e
of Mar x,
London: 1973; and Mar shal l
Sahl i ns, Cul t ur e and Pr ac t i c al Reason, Chi c ago
: 1976.
34.

Thi s vul ner abl i t y of t he
"f r agi l e" ac hi evement pr i nc i pl e t o t hese
booms and bust s l ends a
c er t ai n
pl ausi bi l i t y t o Mar x' s seemi ngl y si mpl i st i c
c omment s ont hepr obl emof t he"r ai si ng"
of pr ol et ar i an c onsc i ousness . At t i mes, Mar xwas
ext r emel y vague ( "Thedi ssol ut i on of
. . .
ol di deas keeps even pac ewi t ht hedi ssol ut i on
of t heol dc ondi t i ons of exi st enc e",
et c . ) ; most
of t en, he st r essed t hat pr ac t i c al ac t i on
( bot h el ec t or al andt r adeuni on) by
wor ker s i n t hei r
r evol ut i onar y movement woul d
i t sel f r e- shape andc l eanse t he
t r adi t i onal "muc k" of t hei r
i nt er nal i zed t hought s and habi t s .
As I shal l ar guebel ow, t hese
f or mul at i ons ( i nwhi c h, as t he
82
THELEGACYOFPOLITICALECONOMY
famous 1859 Pr eface expr essed i t ,
"consci ousness must be expl ai ned . . . fr omt he
cont r adi ct i onof mat er i al l i fe, fr omt he exi st i ng
confl i ct bet weent hesoci al pr oduct i ve for ces
andt he r el at i ons of pr oduct i on") become
especi al l y pr obl emat i cal under t hecondi t i ons of
advanced capi t al i sm.
35.

"' Kr i sendesKr i senmanagement ' : El ement e
ei ner pol i t i schen Kr i sent heor i e", i n M. J ani cke,
ed. , Her r schafi andKr i se, Opl aden
: 1973; "St r uct ur al Pr obl ems of t he Capi t al i st St at e",
Ger man Pol i t i cal St udi es, vol . 1, 1974, pp. 33- 4
.
36. Cf. t he di scssi on of r ecent empi r i cal dat a on
t hese t r ends i n Bob Rowt hor n, " ' Lat e
Capi t al i sm' ", NewLeft Revi ew, 98,
J ul y- August , 1976, especi al l y pp. 71- 3.
37. For di scussi ons of r i ght i st cor por at i smdur i ng
t hi s per i od see Ral ph Bowen, Ger man
Theor i es of t he Cor por at i ve St at e: Wi t h Speci al
Refer ence t o t he Per i od 1870- 1919, New
Yor k: 1947, andMat t hewEl bow, Fr enchCor por at i ve
Theor y 1789- 1948, NewYor k: 1953;
for i t s l eft ver si on, M. Beer , AHi st or y of Br i t i sh
Soci al i sm, London: 1953. I have r el i ed
especi al l y ont hesuper bover vi ews of t hi s per i od pr ovi ded
by Char l es S. Mai er , Recast i ng
Bour geoi s Eur ope, Pr i nct on: 1975, andGabr i el Kol ko, Mai n
Cur r ent s i n Moder nAmer i can
Hi st or y, NewYor k: 1976.
38.

"Bemer kungen zur Wi r t schat skr i se", Zei t schr i ft . fur Sozi al for schung, vol . 2, 1933, p. 350,
quot ed i n G. Mar r amao,
"Pol i t i cal Economy and Cr i t i cal Theor y", Tel os, 24, Summer ,
1975, p. 65. Especi al l y i mpor t ant i s F. Pol l ock, "St at e Capi t al i sm: It s Possi bi l i t i es and
Li mi t at i ons", St udi es i n Phi l osophy andSoci al Sci ence, vol . i x, 1941. Compar e
al so Max
Hor khei mer , "The Aut hor i t ar i an St at e", Tel os, 15, Spr i ng, 1973; Kar l Kor sch,
"Capi t al i sm
and Pl anni ng", Counci l Cor r espondence, 4, J anuar y, 1935;
Her ber t Mar cuse, Negat i ons,
Har mondswor t h: 1972, pp. 3- 42, andT. W. Mason, "The Pr i macyof
Pol i t i cs - Pol i t i cs and
Economi cs i n Nat i onal Soci al i st Ger many", i n S. J .
Wool f, ed. , The Nat ur e of Fasci sm,
London: 1968.
39.

"Pol i t i cal Aut hor i t y", op. ci t . , p. 78; cf. i bi d. , p. 98, "The
Theor y of t he Capi t al i st St at e", op.
ci t . , p. 125, andIndust r y and Inequal i t y, op.
ci t
. , pp.
14, 16- 17.
40.

"The Theor y of t he Capi t al i st St at e", op.
ci t . , pp. 127- 134; cf. "Fur t her Comment sonMul l er
andNeususs, Tel os, 25,
Fal l ,
1975, pp.
101, 105
.
Ar udi ment ar y ver si on of t hi s di st i nct i on
appear s i n hi s di sser t at i on
( Indust r y andInequal i t y, op. ci t . , p. 17) : " . . . t he fact ual
pol i t i ci zat i on
of
soci et y ( t he gr owt h i n t he i nfl uence of st at e power i n t he r epr oduct i on
pr ocess) has r educed mat er i al i ncent i ves as a cont r ol mechani smt o, at most ,
par t i al
funct i onswi t hi n asyst emof aut hor i t ar i ant ot al admi ni st r at i on. . . Invest ment
possi bi l i t i es
ar e cr eat edandr egul at edt hr oughpol i t i cal deci si ons, and
i t i s t heset hat pr oducet he l evel of
economi c act i vi t y necessar y t o ensur e cont i nued soci al r epr oduct i on, a
l evel of economi c
act i vi t y whi chcoul dnot be cr eat ed
by t he i ncent i ves r esul t i ng mer el y fr ompr ofi t - or i ent ed
capi t al accumul at i on"
( my
emphasi s) .
41. Ibi d. , p. 128.
42.

I amher e fol l owi ng Davi d A. Wol fe, The Economi c Rol e of t he St at e i n Advanced
Capi t al i st Soci et y, ( manuscr i pt , Depar t ment of Pol i t i cal
Economy, Uni ver si t y of Tor ont o,
1975).
43.

"The Theor y of t he Capi t al i st St at e", op. ci t . , p. 130.
"Pr oduct i ve" pol i ci es cor r espond
r oughl y t o O' Connor ' s di scussi on
of t he st at e' s "soci al i nvest ment " and "soci al
consumpt i on" expendi t ur es
( i nMar xi ant er ms, t osoci al const ant capi t al andsoci al var i abl e
capi t al ) ; cf. J ames O' Connor , The Fi scal Cr i si sof t he St at e, NewYor k: 1973. Not e t hat Offe
al sor el i es onAl t vat er ' s cont ent i on t hat t he gr owi ng
"aut onomi zat i on" of st at e act i vi t i es i s
di r ect ed pr i mar i l y at t he cr eat i on of t he
gener al condi t i ons for capi t al i st pr oduct i on; cf. E.
8
3
JOHNKEANE
Al t vat er , "Zu
ei ni gen Pr obl emen des St aat si nt er vent i oni smus",
Pr obl eme des
Kl assendampf s, 3, May, 1972.
44.

"The Theor y of t he Capi t al i st St at e", op. c i t . , p. 132;
c f. "Fur t her Comment s", op. c i t . , pp.
104- 5 and "Pol i t i c al Aut hor i t y", op. c i t . , pp. 78, 99f f
. Of f e her e si dest eps t he wel l - wor n, but
i mpor t ant
t r adi t i on of i nt er pr et at i ve c ont r over si es sur r oundi ng
t he ac t ual c har ac t er of
l i ber al c api t al i sm' s c r i si s t endenc i es . On t hi s t r adi t i on,
c f. P. M. Sweezy, The Theor y of
Capi t al i st Devel opment , NewYor k: 1942, c hs . 8- 11;
Russel l Joc oby, "The Pol i t i c s of t he
Cr i si s Theor y: Towar dt he Cr i t i que of Aut omat i c Mar xi sm
I I ", Tel os, 23, Spr i ng, 1975 and
"Pol i t i c al Ec onomyand Cl ass Unc onsc i ousness", Theor y
and Soc i et y, 5, 1978 ; Mar r amao,
"Pol i t i c al Ec onomy and Cr i t i c al Theor y", op. c i t . ;
and Tr ent Sc hr oyer , The Cr i t i que of
Domi nat i on, Bost on
: 1975.
45.

Cf. Davi d Yaf f e
"The Mar xi an Theor y of Cr i si s, Capi t al and
t he St at e", Ec onomyand
Soc i et y,
Vol .
2, 1973,
f or whomst at e expendi t ur e i s a
sel f - def eat i ng st r at egy si nc e i t i s
"unpr oduc t i ve", t her eby
c ur t ai l i ng t he quant i t yof sur pl us val ue avai l abl e
f or pr i vat ec api t al
ac c umul at i on. Ac c or di ng
t o Yaf f e, st at e expendi t ur e c er t ai nl y "r eal i zes"
sur pl us val ue; but
t he pr oduc t s pur c hased by t he
st at e ar e ac qui r ed wi t h al r eady- pr oduc ed sur pl us
val ue. I n
suppor t of Of f e, c ompar e Henr i
Lef ebvr e' s t heses on t he r ec ent emer genc e of
"l e mode de
pr oduc t i on et at i que" i n hi s t r eat i se, De
1' Et at , espec i al l y vol umes I , L' Et at dans l e
monde
moder ne and 3, Le mode de pr oduc t i on
et at i que, Par i s : 1976- 77.
46.

"Advanc ed Capi t al i smand t he Wel f ar e
St at e", Pol i t i c s andSoc i et y, Summer , 1972, p. 483
and "I nt r oduc t i on t oPar t
I I ", i n L. Li nber g et . al , op. c i t . , p. 253 . Mor e gener al l y, c f.
Jur gen
Haber mas, Theor y and
Pr ac t i c e, Bost on: 1973, pp. 228- 9 and Lesl i e Skl ai r ,
Or gani zed
Knowl edge, Bungay: 1973, espec i al l y
c h. I .
47.

"Pol i t i c al Aut hor i t y", op
. c i t
. , p
. 81
.
At t he same t i me, not e t hat Of f e i s i mpat i ent
wi t h
var i ous at t empt s at
c r i t i c i zi ng t he pr esent vi a suc h
f or mal i st i c , "l azy" c at egor i es as
"advanc ed i ndust r i al
soc i et y", "t he t ec hnol ogi c al vei l ", "t he af f l uent
monst er " ; r est i ng mor e
on epi gr ams,
suc h at t empt s obsc ur e, r at her t han i l l umi nat e
t he ac t ual pr oc esses of l at e
c api t al i st soc i al
r epr oduc t i on, as he st r esses i n hi s ear l yc r i t i que
of Mar c use; c f. "Tec hni k
and
Ei ndi mensi onal i f at ; ei ne Ver si on der
Tec hnokr at i et hese?", i n J. Haber mas, ed. ,
Ant wor t en auf Her ber t
Mar c use, Fr ankf ur t amMai n: 1968.
48 .

"Pol i t i c al Aut hor i t y",
op. c i t . , p. 94.
49.

Rudol f Hi l f er di ng, Pr ot okol l des
SPD
-
Par t ei i ages i n Ki el , 1927, devel oped t hi s
ar gument
t o i ndi c at e t he
shi f t i n "or gani zed c api t al i sm" f r om
"mar ket - det er mi ned" t o pol i t i c al l y
c ondi t i oned wage st r uc t ur es
dependent upon t he st r engt hof t r ade
uni on or gani zat i on. Thi s
al sobec ame a keyel ement i n t he ar gument of
M. Kal ec ki , Sel ec t edEssays on t he Dynami c s
of
t he Capi t al i st Ec onomy, 1933- 1970, Cambr i dge: 1971
. I t shoul d be not ed, as a passi ng
qual i f i c at i on t oOf f e' s f or mul at i on, t hat by
nomeans ar et her et ur ns t ol abpur spr ead
evenl y
t hr oughout t he or gani zed ol i gopol y sec t or :
women, i mmi gr ant s and ot her r ac i al mi nor i t i es
t end t o be l i t t l e bet t er of f t han t hei r c ount er par t s
i n t he c ompet i t i ve sec t or ( c f. O' Connor ,
The Fi sc al Cr i si s of t he St at e, op. c i t . , p.
16) .
50.

Per haps t he best exampl e of t hi s
ext er nal i zat i on i s t he r ec ent shar peni ng of wage
di sput es
wi t hi n t he st at e sec t or , a c onsequenc e
of publ i c sec t or uni ons' at t empt s t o peg
t hei r wage
r at es and wor ki ng c ondi t i ons t o
c or r espondi ng r at es and c ondi t i ons wi t hi n
t he ol i gopol y
sec t or . Ont he t heor yof
t he i nf l at i on bar r i er t or ai si ng c or por at e pr of i t s, see
Joan Robi nson
and John Eat wel l , An
I nt r oduc t i on t o Moder n Ec onomi c s, London
:
1973, pp.
190- 1 .
51.

"Pol i t i c al
Aut hor i t y", op. c i t . , p. 94.
52. I bi d. , I pp. 99- 101.
84
THE
LEGACYOF
POLITICAL
ECONOMY
53.

Pol i t i cal Power
and Soci al Cl asses, op. ci t . , pp. 99- 119,
and hi s cri t i que of t he P. C. F.
"st amocap" t hesi s
i n Cl asses i n Cont emporary Capi t al i sm,
op. ci t . , pp. 156- 164.
54.

Thus, Of f e engages
i n Ideol ogi ekri t i k by poi nt i ng i n several pl aces t o t wo di amet ri cal l y-
opposed t heori es
of t he st at e whi ch have emerged under l at e capi t al i st condi t i ons. These
t heori es can besai dt o be
i deol ogi cal i nsof ar as t heysyst emat i cal l y reveal as wel l as censor or
conceal t he
act ual dynami cs of , andconst rai nt s upon, t hi s
"st at eapparat us"; cf. "St ruct ural
Probl ems of t he Capi t al i st
St at e", op. ci t . , pp. 31f f . , "Pol i t i cal Aut hori t y",
op. ci t . , pp. 73f f ,
and ( wi t h
Vol ker Ronge) "Theses ont he Theory of t he
St at e", NewGermanCri t i que, 6,
Fal l , 1975, p. 139.
The f i rst vi ew( t he "i nf l uence andconst rai nt "
vi ewpoi nt s of Domhof f ,
McConnel l , and
t he"st amocap" t hesi s) i ncl udes t hose
t heori es whi ch concei veof t hest at eas
a mere i nst rument of a post ul at ed
rul i ng cl ass . Bri ef l y, Of f e has t he f ol l owi ng cri t i ci sms :
( a) These t heori es cannot
prove t he st ruct ural l y- det ermi ned cl ass- charact er of t he st at e:
"t hey . . . rest ri ct t hemsel ves t o
i nvest i gat i ng ext ernal det ermi nant s whi ch maket he cont ent
of t hepol i t i cal processes
cl ass- bound" ( "St ruct ural Probl ems", op. ci t . , p. 33) . Int hi s
sense,
t hey remai n wi t hi n t he
conf i nes of a pl ural i st model - t hey do not demonst rat et hat
t he
preponderant wei ght
of cert ai n i nt erest groups i s act ual l y a cl ass i nt erest
wi t hout "f al se-
consci ousness" . Moreover
( here Of f e i s cl ose t o Poul ant zas andagai nst Mi l i band),
t hey
cannot
account f or t he f act t hat , onmanyoccasi ons, st at epol i ci es
cannot bet raced back t o
some presumedext ernal
rul i ng cl ass i nf l uence, but must be expl ai ned t hrough recourset o
not i ons of i nf l uence emanat i ng f romwi t hi n t he st at e
st ruct ures; ( b) These t heori es al so
remai nbogged
wi t hi n very si mpl i st i c andmechani st i c concept s of power and
aut hori t y.
The probl emt o whi ch Of f e poi nt s i s t hat "Onecan onl y have
power over somet hi ng whi ch
accordi ng t o i t s ownst ruct ure al l ows power t o beexerci sedoni t , and
responds t o i t , whi ch
f or i t s part , so t o speak, aut hori zes, t heexerci se of power"
( i bi d. , p. 35) . Hence, Of f epoi nt s
t o a cruci al t heoret i cal probl em, vi z . , t he need f or a cri t i cal
underst andi ng of t heways i n
whi ch t he very i nt ernal st ruct ures of t he l at e capi t al i st st at e
guarant eet heobj ect i vei nt erest s
of t he cont emporary accumul at i on process . In summary, Of f e prai ses
t hese i nst rument al
t heori es of t he l at e capi t al i st
st at e f or suggest i ng t he "bi as of pl ural i sm", t hat i s, t he
preponderant i nf l uence of t he weal t hy
and powerf ul ; but t hese t heori es can i n no way
expl ai n
t henecessi t y of t hi s st at eof af f ai rs. Ont heot her hand, t hekernel of t rut h reveal edby
t he"i nt egrat i on" model i s t hat i t poi nt s t o t herecent qual i t at i ve expansi on
of st at eact i vi t y
( "Pol i t i cal Aut hori t y", op. ci t . , pp. 77- 8) . However, t o t heext ent t hat such
vi ews post ul at ea
sphere of unconst rai ned, neut ral pol i t i cal i nst i t ut i ons
wi t hi n whi ch organi zed i nt erest s
st ruggl e t o l i ck t he publ i c sal t bl ock, t hey l apse
i nt o myst i f i cat i on. Thereby, t hey f al l vi ct i m
t o t he st rong pri maf aci eargument s put f orward by
t he i nf l uenceandconst rai nt t heori st s .
Through a di al ect i cal
overcomi ng of t hese t wo apparent l y host i l e t heori es, Of f ecomes t o
deal wi t h
t he"cl ass power or st at e power" di sput evi a anot her quest i on: Inwhat sensecani t
beargued demonst rabl y t hat t hest at es al l ocat i ve andproduct i vepol i ci es cont i nuet o
bef or
capi t al , and have not shi f t ed t he organi zat i onal pri nci pl e
of our soci al f ormat i ons f rom
capi t al i st t o, say, "post - i ndust ri al " or "wel f are"? Expressed
si mpl y, i nwhat respect does t hi s
st at e apparat us remai n a capi t al i st st at e? Of
course, t hi s i mport ant f ormul at i on makes a
mockery of Mul l er and Neussuss' cl ai mt hat
Of f e, t he soci al democrat , has posi t ed t he
"absol ut e separat i on" of t he
l at e capi t al i st st at ef romt hedomai nof economi c product i on,
W
.
Mul l er and
C.
Neususs,
"The Il l usi on of St at eSoci al i smandt heCont radi ct i onBet ween
Wage
Labour andCapi t al ", Tel os, 25, [ Fal l , 1975Q, pp. 18- 23) .
55.

Cf. "The Theory of t he Capi t al i st St at e", op.
ci t . , p. 126, whereOf f e poi nt s out t hat t he
st at e' s "power real t i onshi ps, i t s very
deci si on- maki ngpower depends ( l i ke everyot her soci al
rel at i onshi p i n capi t al i st soci et y)
upon t he presence andcont i nui t y of t he accumul at i on
process . Int he absence of
accumul at i on, everyt hi ng, andespeci al l y t he power of t hest at e,
t ends t o di si nt egrat e. " Thus,
t he st at e' s ori ent at i on t o t he accumul at i on process i s
condi t i oned "st ruct ural l y", and not by t he f act s of "personal t i es", "conspi raci es",
or
common"soci al ori gi ns" of act ors wi t hi n st at e andi ndust ri al
ci rcl es, et c . Of f e i s here i n
accord wi t h Poul ant zas' st i ngi ng cri t i ci sm of
Mi l i band' s f ai l ure t o grasp t he st at e as an
obj ect i vesyst emof regul ar connect i ons
whose"personnel " are i na real sensei t s "agent s" or
"bearers . "
85
JOHNKEANE
56.

" Pol i t i cal Aut hor i t y' , op.
ci t . , pp. 95- 6, 101- 2; cf . " TheAbol i t i on
of Mar ket Cont r ol andt he
Pr obl emof
Legi t i macy I I " , Kapi t al i st at e, 2, 1973, passi m.
57.
These f or mul at i ons ar e uncomf or t abl y
common i n r ecent
Mar xi st debat es on t he
i nt er nat i onal
r ecessi on f r oma " pol i t i cal
economy" per spect i ve. See, f or
exampl e, I an
Gough, " St at e Expendi t ur e i n Advanced
Capi t al i sm" , NewLef t Revi ew,
92, 1975, p. 66:
" The basi c st r uggl e at bot h
t heeconomi c and pol i t i cal l evel t oday
i s
of
cour se t hat bet ween
capi t al and l abour . " The
" post - t heor et i ci st " phase of Al t husser i ani sm
al so di spl ays t hi s
f ai t hf ul f or mal i sm,
as i n Poul ant zas, Cl asses i n Cont empor ar y
Capi t al i sm, op. ci t . , sect i on 3
and " The Capi t al i st
St at e" , op. ci t . , p. 69: " . . . t hewor ki ng
cl ass i s nei t her i nt egr at ed nor
di l ut ed i n t he' syst em'
. I t cont i nues t o exi st as a di st i nct
cl ass, whi ch i s pr eci sel y what soci al
democr acy demonst r at es
( per t i nent ef f ect s) , si nce i t t oo
i s a wor ki ngcl ass phenomenon ( as
Leni n knewonl y
t oo wel l ) , wi t h i t s own speci al
l i nks wi t h t he wor ki ng cl ass
. . . So t he
wor ki ng cl ass cont i nues
t o be a di st i nct cl ass, whi ch
al so ( and chi ef l y) means we can
r easonabl y hope
t hat i t wi l l not et er nal l y cont i nue -
wher e i t st i l l does - t o be soci al -
democr at i c and t hat
soci al i sms' pr ospect s t her ef or e
r emai n i nt act i n Eur ope. " Fr oma
Canadi an
per spect i ve, t hi s f or mal i smpr edomi nat es
i n Har ol d Chor ney et . al , " TheSt at e
and Pol i t i cal Economy" , t hi s
Jour nal , Vol . 1, No . 3, Fal l , 1977, and Leo
Pani t ch, ed. , The
Canadi an St at e: Pol i t i cal
Economy and Pol i t i cal Power , Tor ont o and
Buf f al o : 1977.
58.

" Pol i t i cal Aut hor i t y" , op. ci t . , p.
102.
59.

To
use t he t er mof P . Bachr ach and M.
Bar at z, Power and Pover t y, New
Yor k
:
1970; cf .
Of f e' s
i nt r oduct i on t o t hei r wor k, " Ei nl ei t ung" ,
P. Bachr ach and M. Bar at z, Macht and
Ar mut . Ei ne
t heor ei i sch- empi r i sche Unt er suchung,
Fr ankf ur t amMai n: 1977; and
" St r uct ur al Pr obl ems" ,
op. ci t . , pp. 36 f f . , wher e he el abor at es t hr ee
f or ms of sel ect i vi t y
oper at i ng at t he st r uct ur al ,
i deol ogi cal , pr ocess, and r epr essi ve
" l evel s . " Not e t hat
Luhmann' s syst em- t heor et i cal
ar gument ( i n hi s Sozi ol ogi sche Auj kl ar ung,
i n t he debat e
wi t h
Haber mas, and el sewher e)
t hat al l soci o- pol i t i cal or gani zat i ons i nvol ve
a sel ect i ve
" r educt i on of soci al compl exi t y" ,
i . e
. ,
a necessar y pr ot ect i on agai nst a chaot i c
mul t i pl i ci t y of
possi bl e
event s, i s seen by Of f e t o
be i ncapabl e of assessi ng t hei r degr ee
of hi st or i cal l y-
speci f i c r epr essi veness .
60.

" Advanced Capi t al i sm" ,
op. ci t . , p. 485; cf . " Pol i t i cal Aut hor i t y" ,
op. ci t . , pp. 103- 5, " Ei n
bi eder mei er l i cher Weg zum
Sozi al i smus?" , Der Spi egel , 24, Febr uar y 24,
1975, wher e Of f e
sl ams
t he West Ger man S. P. D. f or i t s
habi t ual r el i ance on " si l ent conf i dence wor k"
( ger auschl ose " Ver t r auensar bei t " ) i n i t s
pol i cy maki ng, and I ndust r y and
I nequal i t y, op.
ci t . , pp.
12- 13: " The soci al i mager y of t he achi evi ng
soci et y i s domi nat ed by t he abst r act
not i on of ' ef f i ci ency'
. Thi s i mpl i es not onl y t her epr essi on
of t hosepr act i cal desi r es whi ch
cannot demonst r at e
any f unct i onal cont r i but i on t o t he
over al l syst emof achi evement , but
al so di scr i mi nat i on agai nst
any at t empt t o chal l enge t he cr i t er i a
of achi evement and
ef f i ci ency
t hr ough t hef r amewor k of
concept s of use val ue. "
61 .

" TheTheor y of t he
Capi t al i st St at e" , op. ci t . , pp. 140, 143
. Of f e' s ent husi ast i c assumpt i on
t hat " Par t i ci pat i on and
unf i l t er ed conf l i ct t ends t o i nt er f er e wi t h
t he i nst i t ut i onal
const r ai nt s under whi ch st at e
agenci es havet o oper at e, and, as coul dbe
demonst r at edi n t he
cases
of par t i ci pat i on- based wel f ar e pol i ci es, ur ban
pol i ci es, andeducat i on pol i ci es, l eadt o
a hi ghl y
unst abl e si t uat i on" needs t o be t emper ed
wi t h t he mor esober i ng possi bi l i t y of
" pseudo- par t i ci pat i on" ,
whi ch has of t en pr ovi dedusef ul t echni cal i nf or mat i on
andl evel s of
" cl i ent mot i vat i on" f or pl anner s
. Ther eby, t hescopeandf easi bi l i t y of t he
pl anni ng pr ocess i s
f aci l i t at ed: t he squeaky wheel
has r ecei ved i t s gr ease.
62.

" Pol i t i cal
Aut hor i t y" , op. ci t . , pp. 104- 5
.
I n hi s
mor er ecent wr i t i ngs, Of f e t ends t o deny t he
st at e' s capaci t y t o
manage t he pr oduct i on of symbol s,
as
i n
hi s cr i t i que of Edel man and
Maynt z i n " I nt r oduct i on
t o Par t 11" , op. ci t . , pp. 257- 9. I shal l
r et ur n t o t hi s poi nt . Mor e
gener al l y, see one of
t he f i nest wor ks of Ji i r gen
Haber mas, St r ukur wandel der
86
THE
LEGACYOFPOLI TI CALECONOMY
df f ent l i chkei i . Unt ersuchungen zuei ner Kat egori e der burgerl i chen
Gesel l schaf t , Neuwi ed
and Berl i n : 1962, where t he at t empt ed t ransf i gurat i on of a conf l i ct - ri dden pol i t i cs i nt o
admi ni st rat i on i s t raced . Here Habermas shows howt he cont ent of an i mport ant
heri t age of
l i beral market soci et y -
t he "bourgeoi s publ i c sphere" ( burgerl i cher Of f ent l i chkei t ) - i s
downgraded by t he pol i t i cal managers of advanced capi t al i sm. Root ed
ori gi nal l y i n t he
di st i nct i on bet ween publ i c and pri vat e i n anci ent Greece, "publ i c sphere", i n i t s most
general
sense, ref ers t o t hat "space" whi ch medi at es t he st at e apparat us and t he pri vat e
af f ai rs of
i ndi vi dual s ; i n bri ef , t o a real mof soci al l i f e i n whi ch somet hi ngapproachi ngpubl i c opi ni on
can be f ormed. Af ormof t hi s
publ i c sphere not i on was resurrect ed by t he European
bourgeoi s i n i t s assaul t upon t he secret i ve domi ni on of f eudal soci et y ; i n monarchi c
f orm
i t
can be t raced t o t he Physi ocrat s' not i on of opi ni on
publ i que, whi l e i n l i beral f ormi t i s
f oreshadowed i n a rudi ment ary way i n Locke and, l at er,
among Scot t i sh moral i st s,
and Bent hamand J ames Mi l l . Of course, as
Habermas st resses, t hese not i ons of a "publ i c"
must not be conf used wi t h t he pri nci pl e of uni versal democracy,
underst ood as t he equal ,
ef f ect i ve f reedomof al l t o bot h use and devel op t hei r capaci t i es .
At f i rst , and wi t h onl y some
except i ons ( e. g. , Wi nst anl ey, Rousseau, J ef f erson) , "t he publ i c" was t aken t o
i ncl ude onl y
mal e propert y owners . Yet at l east t he pri nci pl e of t he publ i c sphere
presupposed t he
possi bi l i t y of a reasoni ng, cri t i cal publ i c i n search of rat i onal uni versal sand t he abol i t i on
of
t he t echni cal rat i onal i t y of market soci et y . I nt ended as overseer of t he st at e apparat us, t hi s
sphere and i t s "publ i c" coi nci ded wi t h such cl ai ms as t he ri ght t o represent at i on, f reedom
of
speech and assembl y, and publ i c
opi ni on . I n t he t ransi t i on f rom t he pol i t i cal cl ass
domi nat i on of f eudal i sm t o t he bourgeoi s cl ass domi nat i on
i n de- pol i t i ci zed f orm( whi ch
Of f e has anal yzed) , t he emergence of t hi s
l i beral publ i c sphere not onl y si gnal l ed a new
mechani sm of l egi t i mat i ng st at e i nst i t ut i ons,
i t al so poi nt ed, i n pri nci pl e at l east , t o
rest ri ct i ons on pol i t i cal power. "I n t he
f i rst modern const i t ut i ons t he cat al ogues of
f undament al ri ght s were a perf ect i mage of t he l i beral model of
t he publ i c sphere : t hey
guarant eed t he soci et y as a sphere of pri vat e aut onomy
and t he rest ri ct i on of publ i c
aut hori t y t o a f ewf unct i ons . Bet ween t hese t wo spheres, t he const i t ut i ons f urt her i nsured
t he exi st ence of a real mof pri vat e i ndi vi dual s assembl ed i nt o a publ i c body who as ci t i zens
t ransmi t t he needs of bourgeoi s soci et y t o t he st at e, i n order, i deal l y, t o t ransf ormpol i t i cal
i nt o "rat i onal " aut hori t y wi t hi n t he medi umof t hi s publ i c sphere .
The general i nt erest ,
whi ch was t he measure of such a rat i onal i t y, was t hen guarant eed, accordi ng t o t he
presupposi t i ons of a soci et y of f ree
commodi t y exchange, when t he act i vi t i es of pri vat e
i ndi vi dual s i n t he market pl ace were
f reed f romsoci al compul si on and f rompol i t i cal
pressure i n t he publ i c sphere. " Agai n, Habermas i s emphat i c t hat t he dual i st i c spl i t bet ween
bourgeoi s ( t he not i on of i ndi vi dual s as but sel f - regardi ng managers of t hei r capaci t i es and
propert y) and ot her- regardi ng, egal i t ari an ci t oyen i s not overcome i n al l t hi s. As he
acknowl edges wi t h ref erence t o J ohn St uart Mi l l and de Tocquevi l l e, t hi s bourgeoi s
model
of t he publ i c sphere vei l ed t he cl ass expl oi t at i on whi ch made a
mockery
of
i t s supposed
aut hent i ci t y . Thi s readi l y became apparent wi t h t he emergence of
t he Engl i sh Chart i st
movement and t he French February
revol ut i on; t he l i mi t ed publ i c sphere was nowst ret ched
beyond t he provi nces
of t he bourgeoi si e so as t o i ncl ude prol et ari an el ement s f or t he f i rst
t i me . Therewi t h, t he publ i c sphere became a court of appeal whi ch was much l ess soci al l y
excl usi ve and racked by vi ol ent conf l i ct . There was a f l oweri ng of pol i t i cal j ournal s,
di scussi on ci rcl es, cl ubs, and t he l ocal pol i t i cal newspaper emerged as a vehi cl e f or publ i c
communi cat i on . Habermas' i mport ant argument i s t hat , i n t he t ransi t i on t o advanced
capi t al i sm, t hi s publ i c sphere has been col oni sed f romabove
.
Ahost of organi zed, powerf ul
i nt erest s i ncl udi ng t he gi ant corporat i ons,
organi zed l abour, t he cart el i zed pol i t i cal part i es,
i ncumbent government s and t he
organi zed mass medi a i mposes i t sel f upon i t . Thi s f i rst
begi ns around t he 1830' s i n Europe and Nort h Ameri ca and i s, accordi ng t o Habermas, t he
harbi nger of t he l at er publ i c opi ni on deal i ng, "t he t ransf ormat i on f roma j ournal i smof
convi ct i on t o one of commerce" and, t herewi t h, t he possi bi l i t y of "publ i c rel at i ons work"
( bf f ent l i chkei t sarbei t ) . The promi se of t he ni net eent h cent ury publ i c sphere
becomes
submerged i n t he commodi f xed domai n of organi zed product i on and
consumpt i on: "When
t he
l aws of t he market
whi ch govern t he sphere of commodi t y exchange and soci al l abour
al so penet rat e t he sphere reserved f or pri vat e peopl e as publ i c, cri t i cal j udgment
8 7
(Rasonnement) tr ansf or ms i tsel f
tendenti al l y i nto consumpti on, and the context of publ i c
communi cati on br eaks downi nto acts whi ch ar e uni f or ml y char acter i zed by i ndi vi dual i zed
r ecepti on" (p. 194). For f ur ther exami nati ons of thi s pr oducti on of l egi ti mati on see
Mi l i band, The State i n Capi tal i st Soci ety, op. ci t . , chs. 7- 8 and J ames Per r y, The New
Pol i ti cs: The Expandi ng Technol ogy of Pol i ti cal Mani pul ati on, London:
1968
; the l atter
i s
an i mpor tant hi stor y of the emer genceof the mer chandi zi ng of pol i ti cal candi dates f r omthe
ti meof the f i r st pol i ti cal management f i r mof Whi taker and Baxter i n Cal i f or ni a
dur i ng
the
1930' s thr ough tothemor er ecent campai gns of Reagan, Rockef el l er ,
Romney and Schapp
.
63.

I ndustr y and I nequal i ty, op. ci t . , p. 11.
J OHNKEANE
64.

Cf.
C. B
.
Macphtr son, Democr ati c Theor y : Essays i n Retr i eval , London: 1973, p. 78:
"Ther ei s nodoubt about thevi ol ence donetothe tr adi ti onal theor y by what
we
may
cal l
the
Schumpeter / Dahl axi s. The tr adi ti onal theor y of (J ohn Stuar t) Mi l l , car r i ed
over i nto the
twenti eth centur y by such wr i ter s
as
A
. S.
Li ndsay
and
Er nest
Bar ker , gave democr acy a
mor al di mensi on: i t sawdemocr acy
as
devel opmental , as amatter
of
the
i mpr ovement of
manki nd. The Schumpeter - Dahl
axi s,
on
the contr ar y, tr eats democr acy as a mechani sm,
the essenti al f uncti on of whi ch i s to mai ntai n an equi l i br i um
. "
65.

"Str uctur al Pr obl ems", op.
ci t . , p. 46.
Thi s
i s al so Theodor e Lowi ' s ar gument i n TheEndof
Li ber al i sm: I deol ogy, Pol i cy, and
the
Cr i si s
of Publ i c
Author i ty,
NewYor k: 1969.
66.

I bi d. , p. 47; cf. "The Theor y
of
the Capi tal i st State", op. ci t
. , p. 127.
Actual l y,
thi s
poi nt
r equi r es some cl ar i f i cati on, f or the gener al f or mof thi s str uctur al pr obl empr edates the
per i od of l ate capi tal i sm
. I t f i r st emer ges wi th thedi si ntegr ati on of theki nshi p basi s of tr i bal
soci eti es and the emer gence of cl ass domi nated soci eti es (e. g . , the ear l y ci vi l i sati ons of
Mesopotami a, Egypt, anci ent Chi na, I ndi a and the Amer i cas, Eur opean f uedal i sm, etc. )
whi ch assume a
pol i ti cal f or m,
the
r epr oducti on of whi ch depends on the conver si on of
pol i ti cal power i nto pol i ti cal author i ty vi a the sacr ed canopy of l egi ti mati ng tr adi ti ons. Thi s
i nsi ght was
captur ed
by Weber ' s
own def i ni ti on of
any state
as "a r el ati on of
men
domi nati ng men,
a r el ati on suppor ted by means of
l egi ti mate
(that i s, consi der ed to be
l egi ti mate) vi ol ence. "
67
.

"Advanced
Capi tal i sm",
op.
ci t
. , p.
480. Haber mas' compl ai nt (Legi ti mati onCr i si s, Boston:
1975, pp. 162- 3. note i ) that Of f e' s theor y of the usual l y- l atent cl ass bi as of the state means
that thi s
"bi as" i s i naccessi bl e to "obj ecti vati ng knowl edge" and, ther ef or e, str i ckenby bl i nd,
"acti oni sti c"
concl usi ons, mi sses the si gni f i cance of the i mpor tance whi ch Of f eattaches to
the theor y of cr i si s. Af ter al l , cr i si s- tendenci es ar e pr eci sel y thoseobj ecti ve si tuati ons wi thi n
whi ch the usual l y- l atent "i ntenti ons" of the state
may become mani f est,
as Of f e i ndi cates
("I ntr oducti on of Par t I I , op. ci t . , p. 246) : "Acontr adi cti on i s the tendency i nher ent to a
speci f i c
mode
of
pr oducti on to destr oy those ver y pr econdi ti ons on whi ch i ts sur vi val
depends. Contr adi cti ons becomemani f est i n
si tuati ons
wher e.
. . acol l i si on occur s between
the' consti tuent pr econdi ti ons and the r esul ts
of
a speci f i c
mode
of
pr oducti on, or wher ethe
necessar y becomes i mpossi bl eand the i mpossi bl e becomes necessar y" (my emphasi s) . Thi s
i s el abor ated i n "' Kr i sendes Kr i senmanagement"' op. ci t . I t shoul d al so ber ecogni zed that
"cr i si s" has nowadays becomeamani pul ati ve wor d f or househol d consumpti on- ther ear e
"cr i ses i n the West", "per sonal cr i ses" "ener gy cr i si s", "par l i amentar y/ consti tuti onal cr i ses",
and so on. I ts mor e cl assi cal meani ng has becomewor n out . Of f e' s useof theter mmust be
di sti ngui shed f r omtheser ecent vul gar i zati ons, f or hi s useof "cr i si s" cl ear l y owesmuchto i ts
ear l y medi cal and dr amatur gi cal or i gi ns, upon whi ch, i ndeed, Mar x' s theor y of cr i si s had
been constr ucted ;
cf. Haber mas Legi ti mati on Cr i si s, op. ci t . , pp. 1- 2 and Theor y and
Pr acti ce, op. ci t . , pp.
212- 235, and the usef ul sur vey of the concept
by
Randol ph Star n,
"Hi stor i ans and `Cr i si s'", Past and Pr esent, Vol . 52, August, 1971 .
68.

Paul Bar an and Paul Sweezy, Monopol y Capi tal , Har mondswor th: 1969.
88
THELEGACY
OFPOLITICALECONOMY
69. "Theses", op. c i t . ; c f . "The Teory of t he Capi t al i st
St at e", op. c i t . p. 139, and "Ei n
bi edermei erl i c her Weg", op. c i t . More general l y,
see O' Connor, The Fi sc al Cri si s of t he
St at e, op. c i t . , and, wi t hi n t he Canadi an
c ont ext , Ri c k Deat on, "The Fi sc al Cri si s of t he
St at e i n Canada", i n D. I . Roussopoul os,
ed. , The Pol i t i c al Ec onomyof t he St at e, Mont real :
1973 .
70. "Int roduc t i on t o Part
11",
op.
c i t
. , pp. 252- 3,
"Furt her Comment s", op. c i t . , pp. 107- 8,
Indust ry andInequal i t y, op. c i t . , p. 19, and"Advanc ed Capi t al i sm", op. c i t . , pp. 487- 8.
These argument s agai n
deri ve f romO' Connor, The Fi sc al Cri si s of t he St at e, op. c i t .
71 . St rukt urprobl eme des Kapi t al i st i sc hen St at ues, Frankf urt am Mai n: 1972: c h. 4; c f.
"Theses" . op. c i t . , pp. 144- 5, where Of f e poi nt s t o t he reasons why t he "t axi ng away" of
c orporat e prof i t s i s of t enunpopul ar
amongsec t ors of c api t al , t hough t hese reasons c oul d
easi l y be ext ended t o c over ot her c onf l i c t s, f or exampl e, over t he operat i ons of t rans-
nat i onal c orporat i ons, dec ent ral i zat i on st rat egi es whi c h c ont i nue t ohave a "regi onal " bi as,
et c . For t he c ri t i que of Weber, c f. "Rat i onal i t at skri t eri en and Funkt i onsprobl eme
pol i t i sc he- admi ni st rat i ve Handel ns", Levi at han, 3, 1974, and "The Theory of t he
Capi t al i st St at e", op. c i t . , pp. 136- 7, 142. In Beruf sbi l dungsref orm
. Frankf urt amMai n:
1975, Of f e has t est ed
t hi s pol i t i c al di l emma of t ec hnoc rac y t heoremwi t h ref erenc e t o
unsuc c essf ul S. P. D. Government at t empt s t o rat i onal i ze t he provi si on of voc at i onal
t rai ni ng. Poul ant zas ref ers t o t hese general pl anni ngdi f f i c ul t i es i n hi s c omment s ont he
st at e' s "c ri si s of represent at i veness" i n Cl asses i n Cont emporary
Capi t al i sm, op. c i t . , pp.
168- 174, as does Of f e' s c ol l aborat or, Vol ke Ronge, who speaks of t he
"pol i t i c i zat i on of
admi ni st rat i on" under advanc ed c api t al i st c ondi t i ons, "The
Pol i t i c i zat i on of Admi ni st rat i on
i n Advanc edCapi t al i st Soc i et i es", Pol i t i c al St udi es, vol
.
22,
1, Marc h, 1974.
72.

"Int roduc t i ont o Part II", op. c i t . , p. 255; c f. "Advanc edCapi t al i sm", op. c i t . , pp. 481- 2 and
"Theses", op. c i t . , p. 145: ". . t he st at e' s at t empt s t omai nt ai nanduni versal i ze t he c ommodi t y
f ormdorequi re organi zat i ons whi c h c easet obesubj ec t t ot he c ommodi t yf ormi nt hei r own
mode of operat i on. " Thi s t hesi s was f i rst workedout i n St rukt urprobl eme, op. c i t . , pp. 27-
63, abbrevi at edt ransl at i ons of whi c h appeared i n Kapi t al i st at e, 1 and2, ( 1973) . The t heme
of abst rac t and c onc ret e l abour i s c ent ral i n a rec ent di sc ussi on by J ames
O' Connor,
"Produc t i ve andUnproduc t i ve Labor",
Pol i t i c s
and
Soc i et y, vol .
5, 3,
1975.
73 .

"Int roduc t i on t o Part II", op. c i t . , p. 256. Thi s argument c anbe underst oodas anal ogous t o
Marx' s c omment s on t he uni nt ended andi roni c "soc i al i zat i on" of t he produc t i ve proc ess
under earl y ni net eent h c ent ury i ndust ri al c api t al i sm. Ac c ordi ng t o t hi s "soc i al i zat i on"
t hesi s, t he organi zat i on and"l evel l i ng" of prol et ari ans under c api t al i st modes of f ac t ory
organi zat i on was seen t o be anessent i al devel opment i n
t he f ormat i on of
a
t rul y uni versal ,
c onsc i ous human
c ommuni t y
def i ned by i t s c ondi t i ons of l abour .
74.

"St ruc t ural Probl ems", op. c i t . , p. 49; c f. "Int roduc t i on t o Part II", op. c i t . , p. 256.
75.

"Theses", op. c i t . , pp. 146- 7 andIndust ry andInequal i t y, op. c i t . , passi m
.
76.

Cf .
C. B. Mac pherson, The ol i t i c al Theory of Possessi ve Indi vi dual i sm, London: 1962 and
Democ rat i c Theory, op. c i t . , espec i al l y pp. 25- 31 .
77.

Indust ry andInequal i t y, op. c i t . , p. 42. Agai nst t he powers of c hurc h andst at e, andec hoi ng
Hobbes' c ont ent i on t hat "AFree- Man, i s he, t hat i n t hose t hi ngs, whi c h byhi s st rengt h and
wi t he i s abl e t odo, i s not hi nderedt o dowhat hehas a wi l l t o", Levi at han, part 2, c h. 2l , C. B.
Mac pherson, ed. , Harmondswort h: 1972, p. 262. Loc ke expressed t he t enet s
.
of
possessi ve
i ndi vi dual i smi n t hi s
way:
"every mani s ent i t l ed
t o
c onsi der what sui t s hi s ownc onveni enc e,
and f ol l owwhat ever c ourse he j udges best ", i nALet t er onTol erat i on, Oxf ord: 1968, J . W.
Gough, ed. , p. 89.
89
78.

I ndust r y and i nequal i t y, op. c i t . , pp. 14- 15
;
c f .
i bi d. , p. 134: "I t c anbet akenas abasi c soc i al
f ac t i n al l i ndust r i al soc i et i es t hat st r at aandc l asses, ec onomi c
power and t he i r r at i onal i t i es
of t he educ at i onal syst emar e
domi nant el ement s of t he soc i al st r uc t ur e,
af f ec t i ng and
r egul at i ng t he c onst i t ut i on, l et al one t he exer c i se,
of i ndi vi dual abi l i t i es . "
79.

I bi d. , pp. 135- 7.
JOHN
KEANE
80.

I bi d. , pp. 17- 20
and "The Abol i t i on of Mar ket Cont r ol andt he Pr obl emof Legi t i mac y I ",
Kapi t al i st at e, 1,
1973, pp. 112- 113. Thi s i s ahi ghl y unst abl e devel opment , and not onl y
bec ause
f i sc al di f f i c ul t i es c ur b t he st at e' s abi l i t y t o f ul f i l l i t s sel f - pr of essed
i nt ent i ons ;
el sewher e ( "
' Kr i sen des Kr i senmanagement ' ", op. c i t . , p. 20) , Of f e makes t he
addi t i onal
suggest i on t hat c ompet i t i on bet weenpol i t i c al par t i es t ends t or ai se t he
el ec t or at e' s expec t a-
t i ons ( "I f el ec t ed,
we wi l l . . t her eby i nc r easi ng t he c hanc es of vot er f r ust r at i on about
f al se pr omi ses .
81 .

Of f e ment i ons t hi s exampl e i n "St r uc t ur al Pr obl ems", op. c i t . , pp. 50- 1;
mor e gener al l y, see
I ndust r y and I nequal i t y, op. c i t . , pp. 15- 17, St r ukt ur pr obl eme, op.
c i t . pp. 27- 63, and
O' Connor ' s di sc ussi on ( The Fi sc al Cr i si s of t he St at e, op. c i t . , c h.
9) of movement s of st at e
wor ker s
and c l i ent s .
82.

"Advanc ed Capi t al i sm", op. c i t . , pp. 486- 7 and "St r uc t ur al Pr obl ems",
op. c i t . , p. 52.
83.
St r ukt ur pr obl eme, op. c i t . , p. 24. The r ef er enc e t o t he "t r i ad of usual
sel f - adapt i ve
mec hani sms"
i s sket c hed mor e f ul l y i n "' Kr i sen des Kr i senmanagement "' , op. c i t
. , pp. 197
f f .
84.

Consi der , f or
exampl e, Er nest Mandel ' s r at i onal i st i c vi ewof bour geoi s i deol ogy as l i ke a
bl anket c over i ng t he sl eepi ng wor ki ng
c l ass gi ant dur i ng "qui et per i ods", Lat e Capi t al i sm,
London : 1975, p. 494) ; al so t he
si mpl i st i c ( base- super st r uc t ur e) l i nk bet ween pr obl ems of
"ac c umul at i on" and "l egi t i mi zat i on" assumed by
O' Connor The Fi sc al Cr i si s of t he St at e,
op. c i t . , p. 6 and
t aken up by Pani t c h,
The
Canadi an St at e, op. c i t . , c h. I .
85.

Thi s i s t he c ent r al t heme of Jean Baudr i l l ar d, Pour une c r i t i que
de l ' ec onomi e pol i t i que du
Si gne, Par i s: 1970.
86.

Cf.
myc r i t i que
of Haber mas i n "On Tur ni ng Theor y Agai nst
I t sel f ", Theor y and Soc i et y,
Fal l , 1977, pp.
561- 572.
87.

Pol l oc k
was one of t he f i r st t o ment i on t hi s poi nt , but wi t hout
f ur t her el abor at i on of i t s
r adi c al
c onsequenc es f or t he ol d pol i t i c al ec onomy c r i si s t heor y:
"Ther e i s c onsi der abl e
evi denc e
. . . t hat i n t hi s admi ni st er ed c api t al i smt he depr essi ons wi l l
be l onger , t he boom
phases
shor t er and st r onger , and t he c r i ses mor e dest r uc t i ve t han i n t he
t i mes of ' f r ee
c ompet i t i on' , but i t s ' aut omat i c ' c ol l apse i s not be be expec t ed. Ther e i s no
pur el y ec onomi c
i r r epr essi bl e c ompul si on t o r epl ac e i t wi t h anot her ec onomi c syst em",
"Di e gegenwar t i ge
Lage des Kapi t al i smus and di e
Aussi c ht en ei ner pl anwi r t sc haf t - l i c hen neuor dnung",
Zei t sc hr i f t f ur Soc i al f or sc hung, vol . 1, 1932, p.
16, my emphasi s, quot ed i n Mar r amao,
"Pol i t i c al Ec onomy and Cr i t i c al Theor y", op. c i t . , p.
66.
88.

"The Abol i t i onof Mar ket Cont r ol
andt he Pr obl emof Legi t i mac y 11", op. c i t . , pp. 74- 5. The
r ef er enc e i s t o Dani el Bel l , "The Cul t ur al Cont r adi c t i ons of
Capi t al i sm", Publ i c I nt er est ,
Fal l , 1970.
89.

On
t hese
mat t er s, c f . Mac pher son, Democ r at i c Theor y, . op. c i t . , c h. 2; Henr i Lef ebvr e,
Ever yday Li f e i n
t he Moder n Wor l d, NewYor k: 1971 and The Sur vi val of Capi t al i sm,
90
THELEGACYOFPOLITICALECONOMY
London
:
1976; Bar t hes' cr i t i cal - semi ol ogi cal anal ysi s,
whi ch seeks t o l i ber at e t he
" si gni f i cant " f r om t he " nat ur al ness" of such " what - goes- wi t hout - sayi ng" spect acl es as
wr est l i ng mat ches, soap powder s, newCi t r oens and st eak andchi ps. Myt hol ogi es, New
Yor k: 1972; Wi l l i am Lei ss, The Li mi t s t o Sat i sf act i on, Tor ont o and Buf f al o: 1976; and
Chr i st opher Lasch, " The Nar ci ssi st Soci et y" , The NewYor k Revi ewof Books, Sept ember
30, 1976; and " The Nar ci ssi st i c Per sonal i t y of Our Ti me" , Par t i san Revi ew, vol .
xl i v,
1,
1977.
90.

Cf . Haber mas,
Towar da
Rat i onal Soci et y
:
St udent Pr ot est , Sci enceandPol i t i cs, London:
1971, ch. 6; al so, Her ber t Mar cuse, One Di mensi onal Man, London: 1968, and Mi chael
Oakeshot t , Rat i onal i smi n Pol i t i cs, London: 1962, pp. I- 36.
91.

G. Al mondand S. Ver ba, The Ci vi c
Cul t ur e, Pr i ncet on: 1963.
92.

Cf . Wal t er Benj ami n,
" The Wor k of Ar t i n t he Age of Mechani cal Repr oduct i on" , i n
Il l umi nat i ons, London: 1973 ; Max
Hor khei mer and Theodor Ador no, " The Cul t ur e
Indust r y: Enl i ght enment as Mass
Decept i on" , i nDi al ect i c of Enl i ght enment , London: 1973 ;
Theodor Ador no, Pr i sms,
London: 1967; and " Cul t ur e Indust r y Reconsi der ed" , New
Ger man Cr i t i que, 6,
Fal l , 1975. Mor e gener al l y, compar e Ar nol d Hauser , The Soci al
Hi st or y
of
Ar t , NewYor k: 1951, vol . 4.
93 .

C. B. Macpher son, " Who Needs a Theor y of t he St at e?" , ( paper pr epar ed f or t he 1977
Annual Meet i ng of t he Amer i can Pol i t i cal
Sci ence Associ at i on,
Washi ngt on, D. C. :
Sept ember I- 4, 1977) .
94.

Et hi ca Ni chomachea, 1139a, 22- 23, i n Ri char d McKeon, ed
. ,
TheBasi c Wor ks of Ar i st ode,
New
Yor k: 1968.
95.

In addi t i on t o t hose wor ks ci t ed
above, cf. Haber mas, Theor y andPr act i ce, op. ci t . , ch. 1;
Neumann, The
Democr at i c andt he Aut hor i t ar i anSt at e, op. ch. , ch. l ; J ohnO' Nei l l , " Publ i c
and
Pr i vat e
Space" ,
i n Soci ol ogy as a Ski n Tr ade, NewYor k: 1972; and, of cour se, J ean
J acques Rousseau, " ADi scour se ont he Mor al Ef f ect s of t he Ar t s and Sci ences" , i nG. D. H.
Col e, ed. , The Soci al Cont r act andDi scour ses, NewYor k: 1963 .
96.

Sel ect ed Wor ks, I, op. ci t . , p. 127.
97.

G. W. F. Hegel , The Phenomenol ogy of Mi nd, J . B. Bai l l i e t r ans . , NewYor k: 1967, pp. 228-
240
; cf . al so
t he
ear l i er J ena cr i t i que of
Fi cht e' s
sol i t ar y
sel f - r ef l ect i ng " I" vi a
t he
ar gument
t hat pr act i cal sel f - consci ousness onl y unf ol ds on t he basi s of t he st r uggl e f or mut ual
r ecogni t i on, t he exempl ar f or Hegel bei ng t he et hi cal r el at i onshi p est abl i shedbet ween l over s
ont he pr i or basi s of conf l i ct .
98.

Cf . Kar l Lowi t h, Fr omHegel t o Ni et zsche, Gar denCi t y : 1967.
99. Thus, as ear l y as 1843 i n a communi cat i on wi t h Ar nol d Ruge, Mar x compl ai ns t hat
Feuer bach' s ant hr opol ogi cal
cr i t i que of t r anscendent al t hought " t al ks t oo much about
nat ur e andt oo
l i t t l e about pol i t i cs . Thi s l at t er i s t heonl y means by whi ch pr esent phi l osophy
can become a r eal i t y" ( ci t ed i n Davi d McLel l an,
The Young Hegel i ans andKar l Mar x,
London: 1969, p. 113, my emphasi s) .
100 . " The Ger man Ideol ogy" , i n East on and Guddat , op. ci t . , p. 421 ; cf. " Wage Labour and
Capi t al " ,
i n Mar x and Engel s, Sel ect ed Wor ks, I, op. ci t . , p. 159.
91
J OHNKEANE
101 . Thi s i s a growi ng
concern. Consi der Kosi k' s di scussi onof l abour
and praxi s ( Di al ect i cs of
t he Concret e,
Dordrecht and Bost on: 1976) ; Arendt ' s t heory
of act i on ( The Human
Condi t i on, op. ci t . ) ; Al t husser' s
concern wi t h " t he reproduct i on of t he rel at i ons of
product i on" i n Leni n and Phi l osophy
and Ot her Essays, London: 1971, pp. 123- 173;
Habermas' " uni versal
pragmat i cs" ( e. g
. ,
Legi t i mat i on Cri si s, op. ci t . , part 3) ; Baudri l l ard' s
concern ( op. ci t . ) wi t h t he process
of " si gni f i cat i on" ; Lef ebvre' s f ocus ( op. ci t . ) on l a vi e
quot i di enne. At t empt s at
reconst ruct i ng t he Marxi ancat egory of l abour were al so a f eat ure
of t he earl i er Frankf urt ci rcl e, as
Mart i n J ay, ( 7he Di al ect i cal I magi nat i on, Bost on and
Toront o
:
1973)
i ndi cat es . Fi nal l y, not e t hat our concern wi t h
" symbol i c i nt eract i on"
coi nci des wi t h t he resurgent
i nt erest i n act i on, l anguage, and meani ng i n t he post -
Wi t t genst ei nphi l osophi cal
t radi t i on ( e. g. , Wi nch, Apel ) , i n t he phi l osophy of sci ence ( e. g. ,
Kuhn' s t heory
of paradi gms) , i n l i t erary t heory ( Derri da, Bart hes, Kri st eva) , andi n several
non- st ruct ural - f unct i onal i st
movement s i n t he soci al sci ences ( e. g. , phenomenol ogy,
symbol i c i nt eract i oni sm,
et hno- met hodol ogy) . See t he sket ch of t hese l at t er devel opment s
i n Ant hony
Gi ddens,
New
Rol es of Soci ol ogi cal Met hod, London: 1976.
Canadi an J ournal of Pol i t i cal and
Soci al Theory/ Revue canadi enne de
t hi ori epol i t i que et
soci al e, Vol . 2, No.
3 ( Fal l /
Aut omne 1978) .
MACHIAVELLI
ANDGUICCIARDINI :
ANCIENTS AND
MODERNS
J . G. A.
Pocock
Thi s essay' s ai m' i s t o exami net hecont ent i on, put forward bysuchdi verse
schol ars as Fri edri ch Mei necke, Leo St rauss and
Fel i x Gi l bert , t hat
Machi avel l i ' s
t hought
and t hat of
ot her Fl orent i nes such as Bernardo
Rucel l ai , . markedt hest art of t hi nki ngabout "modern" pol i t i cs andhi st ory. It
al so at t empt s t o consi der t he pai redt erms "anci ent " and"modern" -what
t hey maymeanandhave meant , andhowfar i t has beenor maybeuseful t o
exami net het wo Fl orent i nes i nt hecont ext of t herel at i onbet weenant i qui t y
and moderni t y.
Leo St rauss hel d t hat wewere l i vi ng i n t i mes when moderni t y hadi t sel f
become
a
probl em. One mi ght say t hat t he word has al ways been used t o
denot e a consci ousl y probl emat i cal vi ew of t he human condi t i on; but
doubt l ess i t was some hi ghl y sel f-confi dent brand of progressi vi st or
di al ect i cal moderni smt hat St rauss hadchi efl y i n mi nd. At a muchsi mpl er
l evel , wecanagree t hat t he concept of moderni t y al ways present s a
rat her
obvi ous probl em, t hat of defi ni t i on. Must weal ways meant hesame
t hi ng? It
woul d not be hard t o showt hat t hewordmoderni s what wemakeof i t ; i t s
meani ng depends l argel y uponwhat wechoose t o pl acebefore
i t .
If weask whet her t here i s a sense
i n whi ch Machi avel l i andGui cci ardi ni
have been, or may be, sai d t o mark t he begi nni ngs of modern pol i t i cal
t hi nki ng, t heel ement aryt hought shoul dsoonoccur t o us t hat what preceded
t hemought t o be t ermed
not anci ent
but medi eval . Thedi scussi on as t o
whet her t hei r t hi nki ng
was
i n fact modernusual l y becomes adi scussi on of
whet her i t can be effect i vel y
charact eri sed
as a
breakaway frommodes of
t hi nki ng whi ch
can
becharact eri sed as medi eval . Thi s i s a great deal more
t han
a
di fference of t ermi nol ogy. . Machi avel l i and Gui cci ardi ni l i ved i n a
cul t ure i nt el l ect ual l y domi nat edbyt he i deas of t he Renai ssance humani st s,
andal t hought heseschol ars di dnot usesuchwords as medi eval , t heydi dhave
a vi vi dl y general i sed not i on of a peri od
i n
t i me
whi chseparat edt hemfrom
93
J. G. A. POCOCK
t hose whomt hey cal l ed t he anci ent s . Thi s per i od seemed t o t hemone of
bar bar i smand schol ast i ci sm, and t hey ai med t o annul i t and escape f r omi t by
r et ur ni ng t o t he anci ent s, r eadi ng t hei r wor ks and i mi t at i ng t hei r act i ons . The
humani st s wer e anci ent s, as t hi s t er mwas t o be used l at er on, i n t he days of t he
"quar r el bet ween t he anci ent s and t he moder ns", when i t denot ed t hose who
t hought
di r ect
i mi t at i on of t he Gr eeks and Romans possi bl e and necessar y.
The poi nt i s t hat we have nowa t hr ee- par t i nst ead of a t wo- par t di vi si on
of
West er n cul t ur al hi st or y, and anci ent i s bei ng used as t he ant i t hesi s, not of
moder n, but of somet hi ng whi ch wi l l soon be known as medi eval . The
Chr i st i an ci vi l i sat i on of post - Roman Lat i ni t y ( or t he Lat i n ci vi l i sat i on
of
post - Roman Chr i st i ani t y) i s seen as occupyi ng t he i nt er val bet ween
t he
anci ent s and t he r et ur n t o t hem, and t he near est t hi ng t o bei ng moder n t hat
has so f ar appear ed i s bei ng an anci ent i n t he sense of onewho woul d r et ur n t o
t he
anci ent s and i mi t at e
t hem. Machi avel l i and Gui cci ar di ni di f f er ed as t o
howf ar t hi s i mi t at i on was possi bl e i n pol i t i cs, and we shal l r et ur n t o t hei r
debat e; but t hey
wer e
di scussi ng t he gover ni ng assumpt i on of t hei r cul t ur e,
namel y t hat i t was
possi bl e.
I t i s i mpl i ci t i n al l t hi s t hat t he humani st s under st ood t he Chr i st i an Lat i ni t y
whi ch t hey cal l ed bar bar ous, t he medi eval , as a r adi cal deni al of anci ent
val ues, and so i t had been. But equat i ng t he
Chr i st i an wi t h t he bar bar ous was
a danger ous game, not t o be pl ayed t o' a
f i ni sh unt i l t he t i me of t he
phi l osophes; and gi ven t hat wi t h some
. except i ons =of whomMachi avel l i
may have been one -
t he humani st s di d not wi sh t o br eak wi t h Chr i st i an
val ues
and bel i ef s,
t her e was a f or mi dabl e t ensi on bet ween r et ent i on of t hese
bel i ef s and di r ect i mi t at i on of t he pagan
aut hor s . Al l t hat t he humani st s wer e
br i ngi ng about was a shar p i ncr ease
i n t he r i sks of a game as ol d as t he Fat her s
of t he Chur ch, and even t he
neo- pagans among t hemwer e anci ent s, not
moder ns .
St r auss was cer t ai nl y not i gnor ant of t he meani ng of t he wor d medi eval ,
and he knewt hat among i t s many meani ngs i t denot ed a per i od dur i ng whi ch
t he val ues of anci ent pol i t i cal phi l osophy had i n some ways been deni ed and
set asi de i n f avour of t hose of monot hei st r el i gi on. He
r i ght l y hel d, however ,
t hat i n so f ar
as
t her e had cont i nued t o be pol i t i cal phi l osophy, i t had been t he
phi l osophy of Pl at o and Ar i st ot l e, and he hel d - wi t h consi der abl e
j ust i f i cat i on - t hat t he gul f bet ween t hi s and t he r eveal ed
r el i gi ons had i n
many ways been br i dged, so t hat
t her e cont i nued t o be a gr and t r adi t i on of
anci ent
phi l osophy t hr oughout t he medi eval cent ur i es . He poi nt ed out t hat
f or Pl at o and Ar i st ot l e, pol i t i cal phi l osophy cul mi nat ed i n t he knowl edge of a
God, and he bel i eved ( cor r ect l y) t hat t her e had al ways been mi nds at wor k
i n
t he monot hei st syst ems l abour i ng t o r econci l e t he God of r evel at i on
wi t ht he
God of phi l osophy. Hi s i nsi st ence t hat
t hi s coul d onl y be done wi t h t he ai d of
esot er i c t eachi ng mi ght have got
hi mi nt o t r oubl e i n t he medi eval Uni ver si t y of
94
MACHI AVELLI ANDGUI CCI ARDI NI
Par i s, wher e such pr obl ems wer e not or i ousl y open
t o publ i c di sput at i on; but
i t was i n Chr i st i an Par i s, mor e t han i n Musl i mSpai n whi chper haps St r auss
bet t er under st ood, t hat t hej ust i f i cat i on of phi l osophy i n a monot hei st set t i ng
became t he j ust i f i cat i on of Ar i st ot el i an pol i t i cal
soci et y i n t he set t i ng of t he
monot hei st uni ver se, t hat t he ci t y was pr esent ed as l eadi ng t o
t he knowl edge
of God. Her eSt r auss' hi ghl y i ndi vi dual i nt er pr et at i on j oi ns hands wi t h many
f ar mor e si mpl i st i c account s of Machi avel l i as moder n i n t he sense of not
medi eval .
I t i s wi t h t he Chr i st i ani sed Ar i st ot el i ani smof t he school men t hat
. t hese
account s al l begi n, andf r omt hi s Ar i st ot el i ani smt hat t hey see Machi avel l i as
depar t i ng . The t ext books of hi st or i cal pol i t i cal phi l osophy al l do t hi s, wi t hor
wi t hout an i nt er l ude on t he subj ect of Mar si l i us of Padua; and St r auss' s
Thought s on Machi avel l i i s essent i al l y an i mmensel y el abor at e account of
howMachi avel l i i nt ended t o br eak wi t h anci ent pol i t i cal phi l osophy, and
i nt ended t o say many t hi ngs whi ch St r auss consi der ed t he necessar y
consequences of t hi s br each.
Nowone may doubt t hat t hi s i s a
cor r ect i nt er pr et at i on of Machi avel l i ' s
i nt ent i ons, or of t he i deas whi ch he communi cat edt o
ot her
peopl e. Thi s does
not
mean
t hat
i f you compar e hi s doct r i nes wi t h t hose of t he Ar i st ot el i an
t r adi t i on, i mpor t ant i mpl i cat i ons wi l l not appear ; but onemay doubt whet her
i t was hi s i nt ent i on t oexpr ess t hese i mpl i cat i ons, or whet her heor hi s r eader s
consi der ed assent or di ssent f r om t he Ar i st ot el i an t r adi t i on t he most
i mpor t ant quest i on bef or e t hem. One mi ght say mer el y t hat St r auss and
ot her s l i ke hi mar e hi st or i cal l y wr ong but may be phi l osophi cal l y r i ght : t hat
t hecont r ast bet weenAqui nas and Machi avel l i i s t her eeveni f t he l at t er di d not
mean t o expr ess i t ; but i n f act t he pr obl emdoes not st op t her e. St r auss' s vi ew
of pol i t i cal phi l osophy does ent ai l a vi ewof i t s hi st or y -a movement f r om
anci ent (meani ng Ar i st ot el i an) t o moder n (meani ng t he negat i on of anci ent )
-and i f you r ej ect t hi s as t he hi st or i cal scheme i n whi ch Machi avel l i i s t o be
l ocat ed, i t does f ol l owt hat you r ead hi mas expr essi ng
ot her pol i t i cal , i f not
phi l osophi cal , meani ngs
t han
t hose
r ead
i nt o hi mby St r auss .
I f we l ocat e Machi avel l i -and Gui cci ar di ni among t he Fl or ent i ne ci vi c
humani st s, t hecase f or char act er i si ng t hemas di ssent er s f r omt heAr i st ot el i an
t r adi t i on i s weakened. The humani st l i ne of t hought , pr eval ent f or over a
cent ur y, was t hewor kof wr i t er s whohad beent r ai ned i n humani st st udi es and
i n t he Fl or ent i ne chancel l er y and ot her publ i c of f i ces, not i n any school wher e
phi l osophi cal di sput at i on was a pr i nci pal means of communi cat i on. As Hans
Bar on
and hi s cr i t i csz poi nt out , Fl or ent i ne i nt el l ect ual cul t ur e was mor e
r het or i cal t han phi l osophi cal , and t he pr obl ems debat ed i n uni ver si t i es wer e
not necessar i l y t hose whi ch gave r i se t o i t s pol i t i cal i deas . At hi nker i n t he
t r adi t i on of Pl at oni c phi l osophy may r epl y t hat i t i s a gr ave er r or t o di scuss
pol i t i cs r het or i cal l y r at her t han phi l osophi cal l y, and may succeed i n showi ng
95
J. G. A. POCOCK
t hat Fl or ent i ne pol i t i cal t hought has char act er i st i cs whi char e t he r esul t of t hi s
er r or . To do so,
however , wi l l be phi l osophi cal cr i t i ci sm r at her t han an
hi st or i cal account of
what t hose t hi nker s meant t o say or wer eunder st ood
t o
say by ot her s .
I n f act , Machi avel l i had not hi ng what ever t o say about t he
Ar i st ot el i an pol i t i cal
t r adi t i on, but i t i s not a necessar y consequence -. as
St r auss and many af t er hi m
have at t empt ed t o i nf er -t hat he meant by hi s
si l ence t o convey t he message t hat i t was not wor t h t hi nki ng
about . He may
si mpl y not have been t hi nki ng about i t .
Thi s i s not t o say t her e ar e no t r aces i n Fl or ent i ne t hought of t he gr eat
synt heses of medi eval Ar i st ot el i ani sm. I n t he ser mons of Gi r ol amo
Savonar ol a, some of whi ch Machi avel l i may have hear d, t he t eachi ngs
of
St
.
Thomas Aqui nas ar e unquest i onabl y pr esent , event hough when Savonar ol a
t hi nks he i s quot i ng Aqui nas he i s somet i mes quot i ng Tol omeo da Lucca' s
cont i nuat i on of t he De Regi mi ne Pr i nci pum3 .
Savonar ol a, however , was
a Domi ni can f r i ar , and Domi ni cans st udi ed Aqui nas
f or obvi ous r easons ; we
have
t o bewar e of const r uct i ng a successi on of maj or
phi l osopher s and
supposi ng
t hat t hi s necessar i l y suppl i es us wi t h t he hi st or i cal cont ext i n whi ch
men di d t hei r t hi nki ng
. The f i r st cr i t i c so f ar known t o have obser ved t hat
Machi avel l i ' s t hought can be r el at ed t o t he
Ar i st ot el i an t r adi t i on was
Tommaso Campanel l a -anot her Domi ni can-about a
hundr edyear s l at er ,
and he wr ot e t hat t he st udy of Ar i st ot l e coul d l ead
di r ect l y t o t he er r or s of
Machi avel l i 4 . Thi s makes sense onl y by supposi ng
t hat whenCampanel l a sai d
" Ar i st ot l e" he meant
Ar i st ot l e as st udi ed at Padua, or el sewher e i n t he l at e
schol ast i c scene wher e synt heses such
as
St
. Thomas' s wer e gener al l y
accept ed, andsecul ar phi l osophy andpol i t i cs wer e
much mor e l i kel y t o exi st
i n def i ance of t hei r conf or mi t y wi t h t he
Chr i st i an f ai t h. The l at e schol ast i c
scene
di si nt egr at es as we l ook at i t ; t he synt hesi s of r el i gi on andphi l osophy
was not uni ver sal , and i t was possi bl e t o const r uct schemes of
pol i t i cal
t hought wi t hout r ef er ence t o Ar i st ot el i an phi l osophy at al l . The
pr esumpt i on
t hat Machi avel l i must be vi ewed as moder n
because he depar t s f r om a
medi eval or anci ent mai nst r eamor
" gr eat t r adi t i on" -t he l ast phr ase was a
f avour i t e wi t h St r auss -
i s not hi st or i cal l y sel f -evi dent .
Hans Bar on demonst r at es t hat t he ci vi c humani st modeof pol i t i cal t hought
had been aut onomous f or r at her mor e t han a cent ur y bef or e
Machi avel l i ' s
t i me; andt he doct r i nes agai nst whi ch i t cont ended
wer e not t hose of Thomas
Aqui nas . I t i s not cl ear t hat St r auss
mai nt ai ned t hey wer e, but f or t hi s ver y
r eason i t may be
hel d
t hat
hi s account of pr e-Machi avel l i an t hought i s l ess
t han sat i sf act or y
. When he appr oached t he gr eat quest i on of t he r el at i on
bet ween pol i t i cal phi l osophy and r eveal ed r el i gi on, hi s eye
was ver y of t en
upon medi eval Jewi sh r at her t han Chr i st i an t hought ,
and f or t hi s r eason i t
was f i xed mor e upon pr ophecy t han upon gr ace.
The Chr i st i an chal l enge t o
t he pr i macy of
pol i t i cal phi l osophy was expr essed f or al l t i me by St
.
96
MACHI AVELLI ANDGUI CCI ARDI NI
August i ne; andwhat August i nedesi r edt o say was t hat soul s wer e br ought
t o
sal vat i on by t he f r eel y oper at i ng gr ace of God, andt hat t hi s gr ace oper at ed
t hr ough t he sacr ament al i nst i t ut i ons of t he Chur ch and not t hr ough t he
pol i t i cal i nst i t ut i ons of secul ar j ust i ce. The ci vi t as t er r enawas ver y sel domj ust ,
andwhen
i t was, i t s j ust i ce di d not l eadt o sal vat i on. Secul ar t i me, i n whi cht he
pol i t i cal ci t y had
i t s bei ng, hadver y l i t t l e t o dowi t ht hepr ocesses of sal vat i on
andr edempt i on, andt hespeci f i cal l y pol i t i cal
vi r t ues -gr oupedby August i ne
under t he Sal l ust i an t i t l e of l i bi do
domi nandi -
mi ght
not be vi r t ues at al l .
Nowi t si mpl y cannot be mai nt ai nedt hat t he
vi ndi cat i on of pol i t i cs as a t hi ng
nat ur al t o man-whi chschol ast i c
t heol ogi ans at t empt ed dur i ngandaf t er t he
t hi r t eent h cent ur y -heal ed
up
t he
br eachbet ween ci vi t as t er r enaandci vi t as
Dei as i f i t hadnever
been
.
The eve of t hat gr eat August i ni an r evol t whi chwe
cal l t he
Pr ot est ant Ref or mat i on, was t he er a of Machi avel l i andGui cci ar di ni .
However super b we may f i nd t he gr eat at t empt s t o ar t i cul at e i t , t he medi eval
synt hesi s was not even i n r ui ns; i t had never been achi eved, and one of t he
consequences i s t hat Fl or ent i ne pol i t i cal
t hought i s not an at t empt at a new
pol i t i cal phi l osophy, but an at t empt t o const i t ut e pol i t i cal
t hought on a new
basi s whi ch, si nce i t di d not addr ess i t sel f t o t he r el at i ons of
phi l osophy and
gr ace, hadbet t er not becal l ed phi l osophy at al l . I t was r het or i c, t he at t empt
t o
use
l anguage as a means of act i on; andt heval ues t o whi ch i t appeal ed wer e
t hose
of t he vi t a act i va.
The Fl or ent i ne humani st s sawt hemsel ves as r het or i ci ans,
as t hi nker s i n
act i on ai mi ng t o speak andwr i t e so as t o r econst i t ut e a wor l d of ci vi c
act i on,
andi n
so speaki ng t hey r ei t er at ed one of t he car di nal phr ases of t he Hel l eni c
andEur opean t r adi t i on:
t hat mani s by nat ur e a pol i t i cal ani mal , i ncompl et e
unl ess enact i ng and decl ar i ng
hi msel f wi t hi n a scheme of ci vi c r el at i onshi ps .
Nowal t hought hi s i s one of t hef undament al
pr emi ses of pol i t i cal phi l osophy,
i t hadbeen i nsi st ed on by Pl at o, andi n hi s own
way by Ar i st ot l e, t hat pol i t i cal
exi st ence i s i mper f ect unl ess compl et ed by phi l osophy.
The humani st
emphasi s ont he vi t a act i vacan be r ead as ar et ur nt o t hewor l d
of Per i cl es and
Al ci bi ades,
t o act i onas i t hadbeen bef or ei t was quest i oned by
Socr at es . Tr ue,
and ver y i mpor t ant ; but ( I ) such a r et ur n was r adi cal l y anci ent
and not
moder n; ( 2) we f ur t her mi si nt er pr et
t he whol e pr obl emof ant i qui t y i f we do
not r eal i se t hat t he anci ent s sought af t er by t he
humani st s wer e not pr e-
Socr at i c Gr eeks but mi ddl e-St oi c Romans; ( 3) t he doct r i ne
t hat ci t i zenshi p
must be compl et ed
by phi l osophy had been dr ast i cal l y al t er ed by August i ne
and ot her Fat her s, who
had cr eat ed a uni ver se i n whi ch phi l osophy was
t r ansf or med i nt o gr ace. St r auss sawi n
hi st or y t he unr emi t t i ng st r uggl e-of t he
phi l osopher s t o r econquer gr ace f or t hemsel ves, but he
seemst o have t hought
t hat t he phi l osopher s had usual l y won. Ther e woul d
not have been a
Pr ot est ant Ref or mat i on i f
t hey had won, and t her e mi ght not have been a
humani st r evi val i n
pol i t i cs ei t her .
97
J. G. A. POCOCK
Gi vena worl d i nwhi ch
grace -however muchdegraded and
corrupt edby
t he Church -
hel d agai nst t he compet i t i on
of phi l osophy t he rol e of
compl et i ng
and perf ect i ng pol i t i cal nat ure, t here coul d
be onl y t wo -but
overl appi ng -out comes f or t he humani st
revi val of t he assert i on t hat man
was by
nat urepol i t i cal and t hat t heci t y perf ect ed
hi s nat ure. Ei t her ci t i zenshi p
must be
seen as doi ng t he workof grace -as
i s procl ai med i n t he sermons of
Savonarol a5 -or i t must do i t s ownworki n
somei ndi f f erencet ot he workof
grace, as seems t o bet he message of
Machi avel l i . Wedo not underst and t he
si xt eent h cent ury i f we suppose t hat anci ent
phi l osophy hel d t he f i el d i nt act
agai nst t he onsl aught s of grace; and t ot reat t he
hi st ory of phi l osophy byi t sel f ,
and
organi ze i t i nt o anci ent and modern,
may wel l encourage us t o do so.
I f we l ook at t he hi st ory of what some
cal l ci vi c humani smand ot hers
cl assi cal republ i cani smb, we may see t he
f ol l owi ng. Cert ai n Fl orent i ne
humani st s
revi ved t hedoct ri ne t hat t he
republ i c or pol i s cont ai nedal l t hat was
necessary t o t he compl et i on
of human l i f e on eart h; and t hey di d so i n a
Chri st i an cont ext where
t he ci vi t as t errena of pol i t i cs was set over agai nst t he
ci vi t as Dei of grace. For reasons
connect ed wi t h t he sharpness of t hi s
ant i t hesi s, t hey descri bed t he republ i c
i nt erms of t he vi t a act i va i nst ead of t he
vi t a cont empl at i va,
and i t i s correct t o poi nt out t hat t hi s was l i kel y
t o ent ai l
someabandonment
of t he At heni an post ul at e t hat act i on must be
compl et ed
by phi l osophy; but
we mi st ake t he hi st ori cal cont ext i f we suppose t hat
August i ni an grace had been
re-absorbed by Thomi st or Ari st ot el i an
phi l osophy. These Fl orent i nes
depi ct ed t hei r own republ i c as ani nheri t or or
revi val of t heanci ent republ i c t ypi f i ed
by Rome, and i nsodoi ngrei t erat edt he
humani st vi si on of an
i nt erval of barbari sm-whi chwas al so an i nt erval of
Chri st i ani t y -separat i ng
ant i qui t y and t hemsel ves : ani nt erval , i nt hi s case,
of Chri st i an empi re and
papacy. They had nowrai sed f or t hemsel ves a t wo-
si ded probl em i n hi st ori cal
underst andi ng, such as nei t her anci ent
phi l osophers nor anci ent hi st ori ans had conf ront ed
. Howhad t hi s i nt erl udeof
empi re,
papacy and ( i f t hey t hought about i t ) f eudal i smcomet o
exi st ? I f t he
republ i c was t he normof pol i t i cal l i f e, what expl ai ned i t s decl i ne and
repl acement
by empi re i n t he Roman case, i t s revi val and al l t oo evi dent
i nst abi l i t y i nt he
Fl orent i necase, i t s apparent sereni t yandunal t ezabi l i t y i nt he
case of Veni ce? These were
hi st ori cal probl ems, t o whi ch phi l osophy
suggest ed someanswers, but by no means al l t hat mi ght be
put f orward. The
experi ment i n recoveri ng ant i qui t y produced a great gul f i n t he
humani st
underst andi ng
of t i me, whi ch must be f i l l ed by adduci ng sacred or secul ar
i deas about hi st ory; and
t herewas t he f urt her di f f i cul t yt hat t herepubl i c had
sel dombeen depi ct ed as a sacred ent i t y, l i nked
wi t h t he f ul f i l ment of t he
Chri st i an redempt i on.
I t may next bearguedt hat hi st ory -t hesuccessi onof event s i n
secul ar t i me
-coul d
be depi ct ed ei t her as t he work of grace, or wi t h t he ai d of a sharpl y
98
MACHI AVELLI ANDGUI CCI ARDI NI
l i mi t ed secul ar vocabul ar y. The r epubl i c coul d -al t hought r adi t i ons t o t hi s
ef f ect wer e somewhat l acki ng -be sai d t o do t he wor k of gr ace, br i ngi ng
human l i f e near er t o sal vat i on by per f ect i ng i t s pol i t i cal f or mand ear t hl y
j ust i ce. Thi s i s goi ng on i n t he ser mons of Savonar ol a, who f ound means of
expr essi ng t hi s doct r i ne i n ways not i ncompat i bl e wi t h t he l anguage of
or t hodox Thomi sm: gr at i a non t ol l i t nat ur am, sed per f i ci t
. The
r epubl i c,
however , because of i t s secul ar char act er and i t s hi st or i cal i nst abi l i t y, must be
t hought of as exi st i ng at speci f i c and separ at ed moment s of secul ar t i me; and
t he
onl y way t o say t hat
i t
per f ect ed
human l i f e,
or
r est or ed
human l i f e t o i t s
or i gi nal
nat ur e
-whi ch
must
be t he wor k of gr ace -
was
t o say t hat
t hese
wer e t he moment s at whi ch gr ace oper at ed i n secul ar t i me t o
do
i t s wor k
of
r edempt i on.
Thi s
i n t ur n coul d
onl y
be sai d by r ecour se t ot he pr ophet i c and
apocal ypt i c, eschat ol ogi cal
and
mi l l enar i an, t er mi nol ogi es of t he Chr i st i an
vocabul ar y, and Savonar ol a was nei t her t he f i r st nor t he l ast t o f i nd t hat t o be
a r epubl i can was al so t o be a pr ophet . I n pur sui t of t he l ogi c of t he pr ophet i c
vocabul ar y, he came t o denounce t he Pope as Ant i chr i st , and f ound t hat t hi s
was t oo mucheven f or t he Fl or ent i nes, who wer e accust omed t o t r eat i ng t he
Pope
wi t hdi sr espect ,
but never
f or got t o
count t he pol i t i cal cost s of doi ngso.
Machi avel l i and Gui cci ar di ni may be br ought back i nt o t he
st or y her e.
They bot h f el t consi der abl e r espect f or Savonar ol a, bot h f or hi s r ol e
i n
r est or i ng popul ar gover nment and f or t he ast oni shi ng ef f ect whi ch hi s
pr opheci es had upon t he Fl or ent i ne mi nd; but
t hey
di d not bel i eve
t hat hi s
pr opheci es wer e
genui ne,
and t hey
had
not ed hi s ul t i mat e f ai l ur e-connect ed
l i ke hi s r i se wi t ht he Fr enchi nvasi on of 1494, whi chhad r ender ed r epubl i can
sur vi val mor e pr ecar i ous t han ever . They t her ef or e concl uded t hat t he
sur vi val of r epubl i cs
was a secul ar pr obl em, t o be under st ood i f not mast er ed
by mobi l i si ng t hat shar pl y l i mi t ed _
vocabul ar l y f or t he
under st andi ng of
secul ar event s descr i bed a moment ago. Thi s was or gani sed ar ound t he key
concept s of cust omand f or t une. I f a secul ar pol i t i cal st r uct ur e coul d be
anchor ed deepl y enough i n
r emember ed exper i ence and cust om, i t mi ght
acqui r e a st abi l i t y whi ch f or t une -t he symbol of i nst abi l i t y
i n
secul ar
and
pol i t i cal af f ai r s -woul d f i nd har d t o over t hr ow. I f not , however , ever y
pol i t i cal act i on was i t sel f t he pr oduct of t hi s same f or t une, i t s appar ent success,
i n achi evi ng st abi l i t y occur r i ng as f or t une' s wheel swungupwar ds, i t s ul t i mat e
f ai l ur e and downf al l occur r i ng as t he wheel swung down: I n so f ar as human
act i ons wer e not r ewar ded by gr ace, t hey wer e al l gover ned by t he wheel of
f or t une
.
Ther e
wer e mor al qual i t i es and pol i t i cal ski l l s whi ch i t was
appr opr i at e f or men t o di spl ay i n t he
conf r ont at i on wi t hf or t une; t her e was
ci vi c and her oi c vi r t ue, t her e was pr udence and
caut i on, t her e was
under st andi ng of howa pol i t y mi ght be bal anced and r ender edj ust and st abl e.
These
wer e not
non-mor al qual i t i es,
but i f
one
t hought
of t hemas exi st i ng
apar t f r omt he oper at i on of gr ace, t hey wer e unl i kel y t o enj oy ul t i mat e
99
J. G. A. POCOCK
pol i t i cal success -especi al l y ont he presumpt i ont hat onl y grace coul d save a
ci t y -and t hey were
unl i kel y t o l ead
t o
t he sal vat i on
of
soul s . Any Chri st i an
moral i st must
say t hat t o save soul s was more i mport ant t hant o save t he ci t y ;
but t he repl y had
al ways beenpossi bl e
t hat
i f i t was good t o save t he ci t y,
t hi s
end
must be sought by means ot her t hant hose whi ch l ed t o t he sal vat i on of
soul s.
As earl y as 1420 -and i na t i me of conf l i ct wi t h t he Papacy -Gi no di
Neri
Capponi had wri t t en t hat Fl orence needed menwho cared more f or t he
good of t he ci t y t han f or t he good of t hei r own soul s 7 ; a phrase Machi avel l i
was
t o repeat . Savonarol a had seemed t o showt hat onl y i f Fl orence were a
hol y ci t y governed i n t he f ul f i l ment of prophecy were t hese t wo ends t he same,
and he had not brought hol i ness and Fl orence t oget her .
I n t he wake of hi s f ai l ure -and al so because t hey sawt hat a republ i c must
al ways be somet hi ng more t hana cust omary communi t y -Machi avel l i and
Gui cci ardi ni , t oget her wi t h ot her Fl orent i ne wri t ers, set out t o see what
mi ght
be done f or a
ci t y by t hose vi rt ues def i ned
by
t he cont ent i on wi t h f ort une
rat her t hanby t he expect at i on of grace. Si nce t hey di d not expect t o save soul s
by what t hey envi saged doi ng, t hey accept ed t hat t hei r means woul d be
i mperf ect l y moral ; t hey ai med at achi evi ng st abi l i t y and success, but t hey di d
not expect f i nal success
i n t he cont ent i on wi t h f ort une ei t her . They mi ght
t heref ore have beenort hodox
and pi ous August i ni ans, who hel d t hat t he f i rst
pri ori t y
was
t o save t he
ci vi t as t errena even t hough act i on i n t hi s f i el d coul d
never be act i on i n t he ci vi t as Dei .
They were
not , however ; expressi ons of
Chri st i an
f ai t h
are
l acki ng
i n
t hei r works, and Machi avel l i i s prepared t o j udge
t he
f ai t h
severel y by
t he
st andards
of
t he ci vi t as t errena . The paradox i s t hat al l
t hi s had come about because
t he ci vi c humani st s had repeat edt he Ari st ot el i an
doct ri ne t hat man
i s
by nat ure a
pol i t i cal ani mal i nt he August i ni ancont ext of
a sharp separat i on bet weent he worl dof pol i t i cs andt he worl d of grace. Gi ven
t he Chri st i an convi ct i on t hat t he onl y i nt el l i gi bl e hi st ory i s t he hi st ory of
grace, but t hat grace does not need hi st ory i norder t o be ef f ect i ve -gi ven
al so
t he brut al experi ence of
i nst abi l i t y t hat beset t he Fl orent i ne republ i c i n every
generat i on
-
t he ef f ect
had
beent o
maket he republ i c' s chi ef probl emt hat of
exi st ence i n a hi st ory t hat nei t her grace nor phi l osophy coul d expl ai n. There
was a republ i can rhet ori c t hat
coul d do much t owards expl ai ni ng i t ; but
si nce onl y grace ( and perhaps phi l osophy) coul d f urni sh f i nal expl anat i ons,
t he t heory and pract i ce of repubi canexi st ence woul d never bri ng moral , or
pol i t i cal , or hi st ori cal compl et eness . To adhere t o nat ural pol i t i cs i n an
August i ni an uni verse must l ead t o ambi val ence and ul t i mat el y t o hi st ori ci sm.
WhenGui cci ardi ni asks hi msel f why a republ i c i s necessary f or Fl orence, he
does not answer i n t erms of t he nat ure of pol i t i cs nor t he nat ure of man, but of
t he nat ure of t he Fl orent i nes . They are t hat way, he says ; t hei r
hi st ory has
made t hemsuch t hat t hey wi l l never be cont ent wi t hout a
republ i c, but t hey
are most unl i kel y ever t o achi eve ones . The
onl y nat ure here i s second nat ure,
100
MACHI AVELLI ANDGUI CCI ARDI NI
t hat whi ch i s produced by hi s t ory; but t he poi nt i s l es s t hat Gui cci ardi ni has
abandoned t he phi l os ophi cal pri nci pl e t hat men are by nat ure pol i t i cal and
need phi l os ophy i n order t o perf ect t hei r pol i t i cs , t han t hat t o as s ert human
pol i t i cal i t y i n an Augus t i ni an uni vers e was t o l eave
i t
ul t i mat el y i nt el l i gi bl e
onl y i n a hi s t ory whi ch mus t be
ei t her s acred
or
s ecul ar . Augus t i ne
hadt ol d
t he Fl orent i nes t hi s woul d happen; but pol i t i cal ani mal s t heywere, andt hey
went ahead, bet ween 1494 and 1530, t o f ace
t he choi ces expres s ed i n
t he
wri t i ngs of Savonarol a and
Machi avel l i .
Machi avel l i ' s dras t i c i nnovat i on was t o i s ol at e andappl yt heRoman not i on
of vi rnt , t hat domi nant andrul i ng qual i t y by
whi ch men conf ront ed
f ort une
and
overcame
i t
i ns of ar
as
i t was ever pos s i bl e t o do s o. I n I l Pri nci pe he
devel oped t hi s not i on i n connect i on wi t h t he f i gure of t he"newpri nce", who
-unl i ket he "born pri nce", who was s o f ar l egi t i mi s ed bycus t omt hat he had
l i t t l e t o f ear f romf ort une andl i t t l e need of vi rt i u -hadmadehi ms el f rul er by
means t hat di s t urbed t he cus t oms of hi s s ubj ect s and l ef t hi mexpos ed t o
f ort une andneedi ngal l t he vi rt u hecoul ddi s pl ay. Thi s ki nd of advent urer was
no l onger common even i n I t al y, and i n l at er cent uri es onl y Napol eon
Bonapart e exempl i f i ed t he combi nat i on of condot t i ere and l egi s l at or whi ch
Machi avel l i s ket ched i n hi s port rai t . Wehavet o remember howcaref ul l y t he
newpri nce was def i ned by t he abnormal i t y of hi s s i t uat i on bef orel eapi ng t o
t he concl us i on t hat he i s i nt ended t o be a t ype of pol i t i cal act or as s uch . I t i s
t rue t hat vi rt u i s def i ned as not onl yt hat whi ch he needs as a cons equence of
hi s us urpat i on, but t hat whi ch movedhi mt o perf ormt he us urpat i on i n t he
f i rs t pl ace. Thi s i s l i nked wi t h a s t udy of i nnovat i on as des t royi ng t he
condi t i ons whi ch mi ght have made i t l egi t i mat e; but I l Pri nci pe may be
i nt ended as a
s t udy
andt ypol ogyof i nnovat i onrat her t han of pol i t i cal act i on.
Onceagai n, when Machi avel l i expl ai ns howt he "newpri nce" mus t ands houl d
behave i mmoral l y i n order t o mai nt ai n hi s pos i t i on, we s houl d not l et our
i ndi gnat i on at t he s ugges t i on t hat any
pol i t i cal bei ng s houl d behave l i ket hi s
l ead us i nt o s uppos i ng t hat we are bei ng t ol d t hat al l pol i t i cal bei ngs s houl d.
The newpri nce i s l i vi ng i n a worl d of di s order whi ch i s of t en of hi s own
creat i ng, andi t does not s eemt hat hei s goi ngt of i nd a wayout of i t . Hecannot
change t he nat ure of hi s s ubj ect s by t eachi ng t hemnewcus t oms , and he
cannot al t er hi s own nat ure as f act as hi s ci rcums t ances wi l l al t er ; t hi s i s why
f ort une wi l l
al ways have
power
over
hi m
9. He
i s not t he
aut hor of a new
pol i t i cal order, but a s ucces s f ul ri der on t he wheel of f ort une i n a pol i t i cs
permanent l y di s ordered by hi s own
act . I n cons equence, t hough he i s
cons t ant l y adj uredt o s t udyandi mi t at e t he l es s ons of
ani t i qui t y, t hi s does not
mean t hat t here i s any cl as s i cal t ype -cert ai nl y not
Ces are Borgi a -on
whomhe can
permanent l y model hi ms el f . Thenewpri nces of t he pas t ,
l i ke
t hos e of t hepres ent , l i ved i n di s ordered, not i n
pat t ernedci rcums t ances ; none
of t hei r act i ons coul d be proof agai ns t f ort une, and
every s i t uat i on i n whi ch t he
J. G. A. POCOCK
pr i nce mi ght f i nd hi msel f had t he uni queness of i r r at i onal i t y . Weshal l have t o
ask t he quest i on: i s t hi s or i s t hi s not moder ni t y?
I n hi s gr eat er wor k t he
Di scor si , Machi avel l i t ur ned hi s at t ent i on f r omt he
pr i nce t o t he ci t i zen and consi der ed
t he pol i t i cal st r uct ur e of r epubl i cs . For
r easons whi ch need not be consi der ed i n det ai l her e, he r esol ved t hat
t he most
i nt er est i ng r epubl i c t o st udy was t he ar med and expansi ve ci t y, l i ke r epubl i can
Rome, whi ch al one woul d gi ve ar ms t o i t s non- nobl e ci t i zens and
i n
consequence admi t . t hemt o pol i t i cal r i ght s .
Ther e
was an
i nt r i nsi c r el at i onshi p
bet ween expansi on of t he
ci t y and t he ext ensi on of ci t i zenshi p, or bet ween
i mper i al i smand democr acy . The nobl es gave t he peopl e ar ms
because t hey
wer e needed i n t he l egi ons, and
t he peopl e empl oyed t hei r ar ms i n cl ai mi ng
t hei r
pol i t i cal r i ght s .
Ther e woul d al ways be t ensi on bet ween t he t wo but t hi s
woul d make t he ci t y mor e
war l i ke and mor e f r ee; a bel i ef whi ch Gui cci ar di ni
f ound he
coul d
not accept , si nce t her e coul d be nei t her r ul e nor l awwi t hout
or der ,
even i f t hi s must be
i mposed by aut hor i t y . Leo St r auss' Thought s on
Machi avel l i consi st s l ar gel y of a ser i es of ar gument s t o t he ef f ect t hat t hi s
cr eat i ve t ensi on bet ween nobl es and peopl e i s a decept i on, and t hat t he
Di scor si consi st s of a ser i es of cover t i nst r uct i ons t o t he r ul er s on howt he
r ul ed may be mani pul at ed and decei ved. The ar gument s ar e t or t ur ed and
t he
concl usi ons exagger at ed . The r el at i on bet ween
nobl es and peopl e i s
ambi guous ; i t i s assumed t hat t he
nobl es wi l l t r y t o decei ve, as t he peopl e wi l l
t r y
not t o be decei ved, and t hat
t he vi ct or y of ei t her may be occasi onal l y
desi r abl e, j ust
as
t he
t ensi on
bet ween t he t wo wi l l be per manent l y val uabl e.
Ever y r eader of Machi avel l i ' s age and t he next who consi der ed t he mat t er ,
seemed t o see cl ear l y t hat he was a popol ano who advocat ed non- nobl e
par t i ci pat i on i n gover nment , and i n gr oundi ng t hi s i n popul ar possessi on of
ar ms, ensur ed i n hi s t heor y t hat t he peopl e' s r ol e woul d be mor e t han amer el y
def er ent i al one. Acent r al t heme i s t hat possessi on of ar ms and possessi on
of
pol i t i cal capaci t y ar e one and t he same, and t hat vi r t ur est s upon bot h. Unl i ke
t he vi r t t u of t he newpr i nce, t hat of t he ci t i zen ent ai l s l awand l i ber t y, obedi ence
and equal i t y ; i t has a compl ex mor al code. Because i t s end i s t he expansi veness
of
t he ci t y, wi t hout whi ch i t cannot
exi st ,
i t i s
not i dent i cal wi t h Chr i st i an
mor al i t y, and t he hi st or i cal wor l d whi ch vi r t i i cr eat es i s i ncompat i bl e wi t h
t hat cr eat ed by Chr i st i an r edempt i on. Aci t y' s vi r t i t gr ows by dest r oyi ng t he
vi r t z~ of ot her s ; when one ci t y r ul es t he whol e wor l d, i t s vi r t u wi l l cor r ode and
degener at e; t her e wi l l be a col l apse, a cat acl ysm, and t he pr ocess wi l l begi n
agai n' O. Thi s vi si on of hi st or y i s not moder n; i t i s Roman and
pr e- Chr i st i an,
t hough i t f l our i shed f or a whi l e i n ear l y moder n hi st or y .
Gui cci ar di ni l i ked t o consi der hi msel f a mor e caut i ous t hi nker t han
Machi avel l i , and was mor e cl osel y al i gned wi t h t he Fl or ent i ne pol i t i cal
ar i st ocr acy, al t hough t hese wer e not nobi l i t y . He hel d pr udence
r at her t han
vi r t u t o be t he qual i t y wi t h whi ch men sought t o gui de t hemsel ves t hr ough
102
MACHI AVELLI AND
GUI CCI ARDI NI
di sor der ed pol i t i cal and mor al si t uat i ons,
al t hough t hi s qual i t y t oo was
i mper f ect l y mor al . Thedi f f er ence i s t hat t hr oughvi r t t ~ onecan hopet o
i mpose
one' s own pat t er n ont hese si t uat i ons, wher eas t hr ough pr udence
one ai ms
onl y t o di agnose si t uat i ons whi ch one cannot cont r ol and gui de
onesel f
accor di ngl y. For t hi s r eason Gui cci ar di ni hel d t hat Machi avel l i had
over est i mat ed t he ext ent t o whi ch i t was possi bl e t o i mi t at e t he act i ons of
ant i qui t y ; not onl y di d t he si t uat i ons whi chhadexi st ed i n t he past not r ecur i n
i dent i cal f or mi n t he pr esent -Machi avel l i knewt hi s wel l enough -but one
coul d not , so t o speak, make t hemr ecur by t he i mposi t i on of vi r t i u
ont he
pr esent . I f wel ookcl osel y at Gui cci ar di ni ' s cr i t i ci sms of Machi avel l i
one
f i nds
hi mr epeat edl y sayi ngt hat we cannot i mi t at e t he act i ons of t he
ear l y Romans
unl ess we command l egi ons of ar med ci t i z ens' 1 . I t i s a car di nal
f act about hi s
own t i mes t hat Fl or ence di d not command a ci t i z en mi l i t i a -
al t hough he
agr ees t hat i t woul d be a ver y
good
t hi ng,
mor al l y as wel l as pol i t i cal l y, i f t her e
wer e one. Ther e i s need of t he sagaci t y of a wi se and pr udent
f ew, who can
gui de t he ci t y' s pol i cy i nsi t uat i ons whi char ms cannot command.
So
f ar
t her e
i s l i t t l e
di sagr eement wi t h Machi avel l i i n pr i nci pl e or t heor y, but
Gui ccci ar di ni does go on
t o expr ess doubt whet her t her e ever exi st ed t he
i nt i mat e r el at i onshi p
bet ween ar ms and ci t i z enshi p whi ch Machi avel l i had
det ect ed at Rome. The
pl ebi ans wer e not good ci t i z ens because t hei r ar ms
made t hemso;
mi l i t ar y di sci pl i ne was ani ndependent var i abl e, f oundedby t he
ki ngs
r at her t hant he consul s, whi chhel d Romet oget her whent he
di ssensi ons
of
nobl es and peopl e, i nher ent i n t he r epubl i c' s pol i t i cal st r uct ur e, woul d
ot her wi se
have t or n t he ci t y apar t 1 z .
What seems t o be
happeni ngher e i s t hat Gui cci ar di ni ' s r ej ect i onof t he
vi r t t t
whi ch can cont r ol t he pr esent
i s i ncr easi ng hi s scept i ci smas t o t he ext ent t o
whi ch we can gui de our sel ves
by knowi ng t he past , and consequent l y hi s
awar eness of t he i ncoher ence and el usi veness
of al l hi st or i cal si t uat i ons past
and
pr esent . I n addi t i on t o hi s Consi der at i ons
on Machi avel l i ' s Di scour ses,
hi s Ri cor di -
a col l ect i on of pol i t i cal maxi ms
-devel oped a ser i es of
war ni ngs about
t he ext r eme di f f i cul t y of appl yi ng pr udence
i t sel f t o t he
under st andi ng of
hi st or y and pol i t i cs, and howeasy i t i s t o l et one' s
sensi t i vi t y
t o t he compl exi t y of t hi ngs
bet r ay one i nt o bel i evi ng t hat one has
compr ehended t hem, wher eas i t i s t he
cont r ar y l esson t hat one ought t o be
l ear ni ng1 3.
I n hi s l ast and gr eat est wor k, t he Hi st or y
of I t al y, we seemt o see
hi mi n r et i r ement
f r omact i ve pol i t i cs, movi ng t owar ds t he
bel i ef t hat not hi ng
i s l ef t but t o wr i t e t he
hi st or y of event s, seeki ngl ess t o under st and
t he f or ces
whi ch made t hemhappen
t han t he f or ces whi ch made men -i ncl udi ng t he
aut hor
hi msel f -const ant l y mi sl ead t hemsel ves
as t hey t r i ed t o under st and
and cont r ol t hem"
. Thi s pessi mi smand hi st or i ci smpr esent
t he ext r eme
out come of t he ci vi c humani st s' di scover y
t hat t he l i f e of pol i t i cal soci et i es
t ook pl ace i n secul ar t i me, and t hat secul ar t i me
was cont r ol l ed by nei t her
1 03
J. G. A. POCOCK
phi l osophy nor grace. The f urt her di scovery t hat secul ar act i on coul d be
assured of nei t her moral i t y nor success was commont o bot h Machi avel l i and
Gui cci ardi ni , and had not hi ngwhat ever t hat was newabout i t . What was
new
-or at l east un-medi eval -about t hemwas t hei r bel i ef t hat men were
moral l y and pol i t i cal l y obl i ged t o undert ake act i onwhose moral i t y coul d not
be assured. The pol i s had i t s moral i t y, whi ch was not t he moral i t y of t he
ci vi t as Dei , and consequent l y nei t her moral i t y was compl et e . Machi avel l i
expressed t hi s i n t he i mage of t he cent aur, hal f manand hal f beast ; and t he
secul ar t i me i n whi ch t he cent aur had hi s bei ng canbe appropri at el y t ermed
hi st ory.
There seems asound case, t hen, f or t he vi ewt hat t he Fl orent i nes arri ved at a
posi t i onof hi st ori ci sm, of i nsi st i ng t hat t he cruci al charact eri st i c of moral
and
pol i t i cal l i f e i s t hat i t i s l i ved i nhi st ory. Hi st ori ci smsounds very modern,
i nt he
sense t hat i t i s
nei t her anci ent nor medi eval , yet t he vari et y of hi st ori ci smwe
have been l ooki ng at was compounded whol l y out of t he t ensi on bet ween
anci ent and medi eval mat eri al s . The ci vi c humani st s sought t o i mi t at e
t he
act i ons of
ant i qui t y, and t o assert t he pri macy of pol i t i cal val ues, whi ch i s an
anci ent
i deal ; t hey di d so i n t he cont ext of August i ne' s radi cal separat i on
bet weent he val ues of ci t i zenshi p and t hose of
redempt i on, bet ween t he secul ar
hi st ory whi ch cont ai ned t he f ormer and
t he sacred hi st ory whi ch l ed t o t he
l at t er, and t hese at e post ul at es
of medi eval t hought . Out of t hi s t ensi on
emerged t he Fl orent i ne
vari et y of hi st ori ci sm; but i s t hi s hi st ori ci smt o be
t ermed modern? I t depends
what onemeans by t he word, and one needs
some
canons f or i t s use.
I have chal l enged t he i dea of a
t ransi t i on f romanci ent t o modern, ont he
grounds t hat t he
medi eval worl d was prof oundl y di vi ded bet ween
At heni an,
Romanand Chri st i an val ues . Leo St rauss'
vi si on of hi st ory, al t hough he
mi ght not have owned t o havi ngone
15 ,
was f ocussed ont he
hi st ory of pol i t i cal
phi l osophy,
and on t he assumpt i on t hat Ari st ot el i ans had bri dged t he gap
bet ween pol i t i cal phi l osophy and
redempt i ve grace. There may be a case f or
cont i nui ng t o organi se
t he hi st ory of pol i t i cal phi l osophy i nt o anci ent
and
modern, but t he August i ni an posi t i on
i nvol ved a deni al t hat t here coul d be
such
a
t hi ng
as
pol i t i cal phi l osophy at al l , and I have been advanci ng t he
paradox t hat t he Fl orent i ne predi cament had more i n
common wi t h t hat .
Theyweret ryi ng t o act andt oi mi t at e
i n
a
worl dwheresecul ar andsacred were
so sharpl y di vi ded t hat
i mi t at i on proved dest ruct i ve of al l except hi st ory.
Negat i ng phi l osophy was a phi l osophi cal act f or St rauss, and had
phi l osophi cal
consequences; t hi s i s an
i nt el l i gi bl e posi t i on, but het el l s us he f i rst consi dered
Hobbes t he
f ounder of modernpol i t i cal phi l osophy, andl at er came
t o t hi nk i t
was Machi avel l i . There i s an i mport ant crux here
. We knowt hat Hobbes
ai medt oset upa modernpol i t i cal
phi l osophybecause he t el l s us so hi msel f ; he
says t hat f or t wo t housand
years West ernt hought has been domi nat ed
by
104
MACHI AVELLI ANDGUI CCI ARDI NI
At heni an phi l osophy; t he pol i t i cal andphi l osophi cal consequences
have been
di sast r ous, and t hat t her e i s need f or somet hi ng el se
16
. Hepr oceeds t oset up
what i s cer t ai nl y a
phi l osophy andcer t ai nl y pol i t i cal ; t hi s i s cer t ai nl y moder n
i n t he sense t hat i t di f f er s r adi cal l y f r om
t he anci ent and medi eval . Nowt he
t r oubl e about Machi avel l i , and
Gui cci ar di ni t oo, i s t hat t hey do not say
anyt hi ngabout phi l osophy or phi l osopher s
at al l ; or i f somel i mi t edt r ansi t or y
al l usi ons consi der pol i t i cal phi l osophy, t hey
si gnal t he aut hor ' s i nt ent i ons of
doi ngsomet hi ngso di f f er ent t hat i t
wi l l not be a di f f er ent ki nd of phi l osophy,
but somet hi ng el se al t oget her
.
Thi s i s
what t hey pr oceed t o
do
;
t hey
expl or e
t he i dea of i mi t at i on so r adi cal l y t hat doi ngso becomes anexpl or at i on of t he
i dea of hi st or y. Thi s i s open
t o phi l osophi cal cr i t i ci sm; i t has consequences i n
t he hi st or i cal wor l dwi t h
whi ch t he phi l osopher mayhavet o r eckonas het r i es
t o expr ess
hi s phi l osophy as a deni zen of t hat wor l d, but i t i s not phi l osophy,
but somet hi ng el se. St r auss' at t empt s
t o showt hat Machi avel l i was t r yi ngt o
cr eat e
a
new
phi l osophy i n t he same way t hat Thomas Hobbes was ar e
unbel i evabl y compl i cat ed and i ndi r ect , andt hey
end wi t h not hi ngmor et han
t he cont ent i on t hat he was cover t l y pr eachi nga
pseudo- nor mat i vedoct r i neof
amor al i ndi vi dual i sm, whi ch many have
f ound i n hi s wr i t i ngs andequat ed i t
wi t h Hobbes, as di d St r auss .
Machi avel l i ' s expl or at i ons of t he pr obl emof
hi st or y, on whi ch Gui cci ar di ni
comment ed, ar e al t oget her subor di nat ed. I
suggest t he at t empt was
mi sconcei ved, Machi avel l i was not a pol i t i cal
phi l osopher , andt hehi st or i cal
cont ext whi chmakes hi mi nt el l i gi bl e i s not one
i n whi ch pol i t i cal phi l osophy
i s t he domi nant pr esence.
The i dea of basi ng act i on upon i mi t at i on i s,
i n a sense, pr e- phi l osophcal .
Socr at es andPl at o set out t o showt hat i t was
not enough, andt hel at t er mi ght
wel l have sai d t hat t he humani st s of t he Renai ssance wer e maki ng t he
same
mi st ake as t hose At heni ans who t r i ed t o base act i on
upon i mi t at i on of t he
her oes of epi c poet r y. The Fl or ent i nes devel oped
an i ndependent enqui r y i nt o
t he mor al and pol i t i cal
i mper f ect i on - whi ch was at t he same t i me a mor al
and pol i t i cal necessi t y -
of i mi t at i ng t he act i ons of anci ent hi st or y.
The
anc ; - t s di d not conduct such an enqui r y, but di scover i nghow
di f f i cul t i t i s t o
i mi t at et he act i ons of
ant i qui t y i s not enough t o makeyou a moder n i f you go
on t r yi ng t o do i t and do not di scover any
al t er nat i ve pr i nci pl es on whi ch
act i on can be based. The
di scover y whi ch Machi avel l i andGui cci ar di ni made
of t heenor mous di f f i cul t y andi mper f ect i on of act i on i n hi st or i c t i me i s based
on t he di scover y t hat secul ar t i me i s not cont r ol l ed by gr ace or
r ender ed
i nt el l i gi bl e. by phi l osophy; i t i s not based on
t he di scover y t hat secul ar
pr ocesses i n hi st or y ar e per pet ual l y pr oduci ng
obj ect i ve condi t i ons whi ch
have not exi st ed bef or e, andt hi s i s
t he essent i al condi t i onof anyt hi ng wecan
cal l
a
consci ousness of moder ni t y. Hobbes may have i nt ended t o pr oduce a
phi l osophy unl i ke any t hat had exi st edpr evi ousl y, but I doubt
i f
t hi s means
he
had any moder n sense of hi st or i cal pr ocess
.
Hi s hi st or i cal
scheme r emai ns
10
5
J. G. A. POCOCK
pr ophet i c andeschat ol ogi cal 1 7 ; but Machi avel l i had no suchi nt ent i on
. When
he t al ks of t he needf or "newmodes
and or der s", he means t hat such modes
and or der s must be secur el y f ounded ont he pr act i ce
of ant i qui t y andwi l l be
newi n t he nor mal pr e- moder n sense t hat t hey wi l l be r enewed, "t he wor l d' s
gr eat age begi ns anew, t he gol den year s r et ur n. " Si nce al l such
i mi t at i on i s
car r i ed out i n a wor l d subj ect t o f or t une, t her e i s a pr obabi l i t y t hat such a
r enovat i o wi l l t ur nout t obe ani nnovat i o, t hat sel f - dest r uct i ve mode of act i on
whi ch r emoves t he condi t i ons on whi ch i t was f ounded. The Machi avel l i an
doct r i ne of act i on, t heni s nei t her anci ent nor moder ni nany si mpl esense; but
t he par adi gmr emai ns
t hat of
i mi t at i ng
ant i qui t y i n
t he
knowl edge t hat t hi s i s
not al t oget her
possi bl e.
Gui cci ar di ni ,
who t hi nks t hat Machi avel l i over -
si mpl i f i es t he case, does not di f f er f r omhi m
as t o
t he par adi gm
; whi l e Hobbes
i s
a moder n
who has not become a hi st or i ci st .
Towar ds t he end of Hobbes' l i f et i me - andmor e t han a cent ur y af t er t he
end of Machi avel l i ' s and Gui cci ar di ni ' s - t her e r aged t hat "quar r el of t he
anci ent s and moder ns" f r omwhi ch our usage of t he l ast t er mi s l ar gel y
der i ved
.
An
anci ent was onewho st i l l t hought i t of par amount i mpor t ance t o
i mi t at e ant i qui t y; a moder n was one who di d not ; but t her e wer e t wo
di st i ngui shabl e
i f over l appi ng r easons f or bei ng amoder n. One mi ght bel i eve
t hat one had succeeded i n somet hi ng whi ch t he Gr eeks and Romans had
at t empt edbut f ai l ed t o do; or one mi ght bel i eve t hat one haddi scover ed how
t o do somet hi ng whi ch t hey had never at t empt ed, andshownt hat t hey had
beenont he wr ong t r ack or t hat t hei r
ent er pr i se was nowunnecessar y.
Thef r ame
of mi ndwhi ch hol ds t hat i mi t at i on of ant i qui t y i s hi ghl y desi r abl e but al most
i mpossi bl y di f f i cul t wi l l not suppl y moder ni t y i n t he f or mer sense, andwi l l
suppl y i t i n t he l at t er onl y i f , as t he r esul t of t he t ensi on bet weent heor y and
pr act i ce, "modes andor der s" whi char e i nf act newhave beendi scover edand
expl oi t ed. Hadanyt hi ng of t he ki ndoccur r edi nt he wake of Machi avel l i and
Gui cci ar di ni ? I t seems unl i kel y. Ther e hadbeena wi despr eadi nvest i gat i onof
r ai son
d' et at , whi chowedagr eat deal t o t hembot h1 8 ; but f or t he most par t t hi s
was af ur t her devel opment of t he casui st i cal pr obl ems 1 9 whi ch ar ose wheni t
was admi t t ed t hat t he mor al i t y of st at e act i ondi f f er ed f r omt he mor al i t y of
pr i vat e act i on, andt he consequent at t empt t o i dent i f y t he "i nt er est of st at es",
andshowhowt hese det er mi ned act i on of t he f or mer ki nd, hadnot yet shown
t hat t he moder nst at e di f f er ed i n char act er or pur pose f r omt he anci ent .
Fur t her mor e, whenwe encount er t he "quar r el of anci ent s andmoder ns" i na
st r i ct l y pol i t i cal f or m, and i t i s asked f or t he f i r st t i me whet her t he moder n
pol i t i cal i ndi vi dual i s a di f f er ent sor t of bei ng f r omt he anci ent , we f i nd,
r egul ar l y empl oyed t o def i ne t he anci ent and cr i t i ci se t he moder n,
Machi avel l i ' s equat i on bet ween ar ms- bear er and ci t i zen. He i nsi st s t hat i t i s
t he possessi onof ar ms whi ch endows t he i ndi vi dual wi t h pol i t i cal aut onomy
and t he capaci t y f or vi r t ue i n ei t her a cl assi cal or a Machi avel l i an sense.
1 06
MACHI AVELLI
ANDGUI CCI ARDI NI
St r auss cont ended t hat Machi avel l i , l i ke Hobbes, was t he aut hor of a r adi cal
i ndi vi dual i smwhi ch depi ct ed men as seeki ng pr i vat e good f i r st and publ i c
good second; but what we f i nd, t owar ds t he year 1700, i s a per si st ent cont r ast
bet ween t he anci ent or medi eval war r i or whose ar ms per mi t t edhi mt oengage
i n hi s own gover nment , and t he i ndi vi dual of commer ci al and cul t i vat ed
soci et y who pr ef er r edt opur chaset hegoods whi chcommer ce made possi bl e,
whi l e payi ng ot her s t o def end hi m, gover n hi mandr epr esent hi m' . Thel at t er
i s t hear chet ype of moder ni t y and i s onl y ver y i ndi r ect l y t hehei r of Hobbes . I f
t hi s i s so, Machi avel l i and even Gui ci ar di ni r ank among t he anci ent s i n t he
gr eat quar r el , bot h
because
t hey knewno posi t i ve al t er nat i ve
t o
i mi t at i on of
t he
anci ent s and because t hey t ended -
Machi avel l i
l ess
equi vocal l y,
on
t he
whol e, t han hi s f r i end and cr i t i c -t o depi ct t he pol i t i cal i ndi vi dual
i n
t he
shape
of
cl assi cal ci t i zen.
I n
concl usi on, t he Fl or ent i nes r ank as anci ent s
r at her
t han
moder ns
; and
i f
i t be obj ect ed t hat an anci ent i n t hi s sense
i s
st i l l
a
moder n phenomenon, bot h
because t o i mi t at e ant i qui t y i s not t o be an ant i que man and because t he
i mi t at i on of ant i qui t y i s a post -medi eval i deal , I r epl y t hat moder ni t y appear s
onl y whent her e ar e secul ar means of knowi ng onesel f t o bea di f f er ent sor t of
secul ar bei ng f r oman ant i que man. The st r uggl e f or i mi t at i on and r evi val
pr oduced an acut e awar eness of hi st or y and a pr e-moder n speci es of
hi st or i ci sm; but t her e i s a pr of ound di f f er ence bet ween an hi st or i ci smwhi ch
pr esent s hi st or y as a secul ar f l ux r ul edby f or t une, andonewhi ch pr esent s i t as
a secul ar pr ocess and t r ansf or mat i on
.
I t was t headvent of commer ci al soci et y
whi ch convi nced t heor i st s af t er
1700 t hat
t he
wor l d
had changed and t he
cl assi cal i deal of ci t i zenshi p ceased t o be vi abl e' l . Thei r hi st or i ci smconsi st ed
i n vi sual i si ng, wi t h Rousseau, t he hi st or i cal pr ocess whi ch had r ender ed man
ci vi l i sed as oneand t he same wi t h t hat whi chhad depr i vedhi mof
hi s pol i t i cal
vi r t ue
.
Fr omt her e
t he pat h
l ay
t owar ds
Kant , Hegel and Mar x, t owar ds t he
at t empt t o i dent i f y consci ousness of sel f wi t h consci ousness of t he
cont r adi ct i ons of t he hi st or i cal pr ocess . To al l of t hi s t he Fl or ent i nes'
cont r i but i on
seems t ohaveconsi st ed
l ess
i n
t hear chi t ect ur e of moder ni t y t han
i nt he neo-cl assi cal ant i t hesi s agai nst whi chi t was shaped. Theywer emoder ns
onl y i n t he sense t hat t hey wer e anci ent s .
Hi st or y
J ohns Hopki ns Uni ver si t y
J . G. A. POCOCK
Not es
1 .

Based upon a l ect ur e gi ven under t he auspi ces of t he Hi st or y and Pol i t i cal Sci ence
Depar t ment s of Si mon Fr aser Uni ver si t y, J ul y 1 7, 1 978.
2 .

Bar on, The Cr i si s of t he Ear l y I t al i an Renai ssance, Pr i ncet on Uni ver si t y Pr ess, 1 966.
J er r ol d E' . Sei gel , Rhet or i c and Phi l osophy i n Renai ssance Humani sm, Pr i ncet on
Uni ver si t y Pr ess, 1 968. Geor ge Hol mes, The Fl or ent i ne Enl i ght enment , 1 400- 1 450,
London: Wei denf el d andNi col son, 1 969.
3 .

See Char l es T. Davi s, "RomanPat r i ot i smand Republ i can Pr opaganda: Pt ol emy of Lucca
and Pope Ni chol as 1 1 1 ", Specul um, L, 3, 1 975, pp. 41 1 - 33 .
4.

Rodol f o De Mat t ei , Dal Pr emachi avel l i smo al l ' Ant i machi avel l i smo, Fl or ence:
G.
C.
Sansoni , 1 969, pp. 1 59- 60.
5.

Donal dWei nst ei n, Savonar ol aandFl or ence: Pr ophecy andPat r i ot i smi nt he Renai ssance,
Pr i ncet on Uni ver si t y Pr ess, 1 970.
6.

I n t he next f ewpar agr aphs I summar i se ar gument s t o bef ound i n my The
Machi avel l i an
Moment : Fl or ent i ne Pol i t i cal Thought andt he At l ant i c Republ i can Tr adi t i on, Pr i ncet on
Uni ver si t y Pr ess,
1 975.
7 .

L. Mur at or i , Rer umI t al i cor umScr i pt or es, Mi l an: 1 723- 51 ,
vol . XVI I I , col . 1 1 49. Renzo
Ser eno, "TheRi cor di of Gi nodi Ner i Capponi ", Amer i can
Pol i t i cal
Sci ence
Revi ew, 52, 4,
1 958, pp. 1 1 1 8- 22 .
8.

Rober t o Pal mar occhi , ed. , Fr ancesco Gui cci ar di ni : Di al ogo e
Di scor si del Reggi ment o di
Fi r enze, Bar i : Lat er za, 1 932, pp. 94- 5, 223, 261 - 62 . Machi avel l i anMoment , pp. 1 25- 6,
1 42-
3, 250- 1 .
9.

I l Pr i nci pe, ch. XXV. Machi avel l i an Moment ,
pp.
96- 7,
1 79- 80.
1 0.

Di scor si , 1 1 , 5; Machi avel l i an Moment , pp. 21 6- 8.
1 1 .

Consi der at i ons on t he Di scour ses of Machi avel l i , i n Sel ect ed Wr i t i ngs, ed. andt r ans. Ceci l
and
Mar gar et Gr ayson, London: Oxf or d Uni ver si t y Pr ess, 1 965, pp. 69, 1 1 7 ; Ri cor di , t r ans .
Mar i o Domandi , Maxi ms andRef l ect i ons of aRenai ssance St at esman, NewYor k:
Har per
Tor chbooks, 1 965, p. 69; Pal mar occhi , Di al ogoe Di scor si , pp. 68, 90- 93, 1 55. See
Her ber t
But t er f i el d, The St at ecr af t of Machi avel l i , London: G. Bel l , 1 955, Machi avel l i an
Moment ,
pp. 239, 245- 48, 268- 70.
1 2 .

Di al ogo e Di scor si , pp. 1 48- 58.
1 3 .

Machi avel l i an
Moment , pp. 267- 8.
1 4.

Mar k Phi l l i ps, Fr ancesco Gui cci ar di ni : TheHi st or i an' s Cr af t , Uni ver si t y of
Tor ont oPr ess,
1 977 . Fel i x Gi l ber t , Machi avel l i and Gui cci ar di ni : Pol i t i cs and Hi st or y i n Si xt eent h-
Cent ur y Fl or ence, Pr i ncet on Uni ver si t y Pr ess, 1 965.
1 5.

Cf. J ohnGunnel l , "The Myt h of t he Tr adi t i on", Amer i canPol i t i cal
Sci ence Revi ew, 72, 1 ,
1 978, pp. 1 22- 34.
1 6.

Levi at han, ch. 46.
1 08
MACHI AVELLI
AND
G
UI CCI ARDI NI
17.

Pocock, "Ti me,
Hi st or y and Eschat ol ogy i n t he
Thought of Thomas Hobbes", i n
Pol i t i cs,
Languageand
Ti me, NewYor k: At heneum,
1971.
18 .

Fr i edr i ch
Mei necke, Der I dee der St aat sr nson,
Engl i sh t r ansl at i on, Machi avel l i sm,
New
Haven: Yal e Uni ver si t y Pr ess, 1957. E.
Thuau, Rai sond' et at ei penseepol i t i que
d 1' epoque
deRi chel i eu, Par i s : Col i n, 1966.
W. F. Chur ch, Ri chel i eu andReason
of St at e, Pr i ncet on
Uni ver si t y Pr ess, 1972. Al t hough
Machi avel l i an el ement s ar e
evi dent i n t hese wr i t er s, t he
r ol e of Gui cci ar di ni has been
l i t t l e st udi ed; see f or t hcomi ng
wor k by Li onel A. McKenzi e,
J ohns Hopki ns Uni ver si t y.
19.

See Geor ge L. Mosse, TheHol y
Pr et ence: ASt udyi nChr i st i ani t yandReasonof
St at ef r om
Wi l l i amPer ki ns t o J ohn
Wi nt hr op, Oxf or d: Basi l Bl ackwel l , 1957
.
20.

Machi avel l i an Moment , ch. 13.
21 .

J oseph E. Cr opsey, Pol i t y and Economy
: An I nt er pr et at i on of t he
Pr i nci pl es of Adam
Smi t h, TheHague: Ni j hof f , 1957. Mor e
St r aussi ano, he l i nks t he pur sui t of weal t h i n Smi t h
di r ect l y wi t h t he f ear of vi ol ent deat h i n
Hobbes. For di scussi on, see Donal d
Wi nch, Adam
Smi t h' s
Pol i t i cs : AnEssay i n Hi st or i ogr aphi c
Revi si on, Cambr i dge Uni ver si t y Pr ess,
1978 .
Subscr i pt i on Rat es
Pol i t y i s apr of essi onal pol i t i cal sci ence j our nal
publ i shed quar t er l y by The Nor t heast er n Pol i t i cal
Sci ence Associ at i on . Pol i t y i s open t o a wi de
r ange of domest i c and i nt er nat i onal t opi cs .
I ncl uded ar e Ar t i cl es, BookRevi ewEssays, and
Resear ch Not es of f er ed i n
a
car ef ul l y desi gned
f or mat t hat f eat ur es an ar t i st i c cover wi t h
ever y i ssue .
Thr oughout
i t s t en year s of exi st ence,
Pol i t y has act i vel y t r i ed t o pr ovi de l i vel y, l i t er at e,
and pr ovocat i ve r eadi ng.
Asampl i ng of subj ect s f r omr ecent and f or t h-
comi ng i ssues :
The i dea of women' s mor al super i or i t y
Er i c Voegel i n' s cont r i but i ons t o pol i t i cal t heor y
Cr oss- nat i onal pat t er ns of uni ver si t y gover nment
St abi l i t y and change i n t he Sovi et Uni on
The nat i onal i zat i on of wel f ar e
Gr amsci ' s pr i son not ebooks
Pol i t i cal t heor y of t echnol ogy
and ot her subj ect s of gener al i nt er est t o pol i t i cal
sci ent i st s
.
NPSA Member s ( r equi r ed of al l r esi dent s of NewEngl and, NewYor k,
NewJ er sey, Pennsyl vani a, and Del awar e- i ncl udes member shi p i n bot h t he
st at e and Nor t heast er n associ at i ons) : $10. 00
Ot her : U. S
. A
.
$9. 00, For ei gn $9. 50
St udent : U. S. A. $5. 00, For ei gn $5. 50
Mai l ( subscr i pt i on or der ) t o: POLI TY, Thompson Hal l , Uni ver si t y of
Massachuset t s, Amher st , Massachuset t s 01003
Name
Addr ess
Payment encl osed, sumof :
Canadi an J ournal of Pol i t i cal
and Soci al Theory/ Revue
canadi enne de
t heori e
pol i t i gue et soci al e, Vol . 2 ,
No. 3 ( Fal l / Aut omme,
1978) .
HEGELON
POSSESSIONANDPROPERTY
F.
R. Cri st i
In hi s Phi l osophyof
Ri ght ( 182 0) Hegel di st i ngui shes bet ween
possessi on
and propert y. Thi s
di st i nct i on, frequent i n modern pol i t i cal
phi l osophy, i s
usual l y
found i n connect i on wi t h t he
not i ons of t he st at e of nat ureand t he
st at eof
ri ght . Possessi onrefers t ot he
excl usi veuse, enj oyment or di sposal of a
t hi ng,
unhamperedbyanyrest ri ct i ons
.
The
concept ual spaceassi gnedfor t he
enact ment
of t hi s possessi ve rel at i on wi t h
t he worl d i s t he st at e of nat ure.
Propert y
emerges subsequent l ywhent he
st at eof ri ght appears, andonecoul d
summari l y
defi ne i t as t he ri ght ful possessi on
of at hi ng
.
In Hegel ' s t hought
t hi s
di st i nct i on suffers subst ant i al al t erat i ons
. Possessi onl oses i t s l ogi cal and
t emporal pri ori t yover propert y. Thi s
coi nci des wi t hHegel ' s t aci t di smi ssal of
t he
not i onof t hest at eof nat ure. The
st at eof ri ght does not appear as aresul t
but
as ani deal fi rst , as abegi nni ng, propert y
at t ai ns anabsol ut echaract er. It
becomes
t he expressi on of t he freedom
of t he aut onomous i ndi vi dual , who
cannow
appropri at eext ernal t hi ngs wi t hout anyki nd
of medi at i on. Theri ght
of propert y
i s concei ved consequent l y as an absol ut e
fi rst anda begi nni ng.
Int hi s essayI wi l l
fi rst exami neHegel ' s di st i nct i on
bet weenpossessi onand
propert y, l i mi t i ng myscope
t o t he Phi l osophy of Ri ght . I
Secondl y, I wi l l
expl ore
t hefat e of t hi s di st i nct i on i n
someof Hegel ' s predecessors :
Rousseau,
Fi cht e and
Kant . Thei r vi ews provi de for
t he underst andi ng of Hegel ' s
st andpoi nt .
The di st i nct i on
bet ween possessi on and
propert y i s made expl i ci t i n
paragraph #45 of
t he Phi l ospohyof Ri ght . z
F. R. CRI STI
That I may have exter nal power over somethi ng
consti tutes possessi on
. The par ti cul ar i nter est of
possessi on i s that I
make somethi ng myown as ar esul t of
mynatur al needs, i mpul ses
and ar bi tr ar y wi l l ( Wi l l ki i r ) .
But that
I
as a f r ee
wi l l make mysel f obj ecti ve i n
possessi on and ther ebyf or thef i r st ti mebecome an actual
wi l l , consti tutes the tr ue and r i ghtf ul ( r echtl i che) f actor i n
possessi on, the deter mi nati on of pr oper ty.
Possessi on i s thus def i ned as anexter nal power over somethi ng. I t i s pr esented
as
a
mer e mani f estati on of power , and not as a r i ght . I t cannot consti tute a
r i ght because
i t
r esul ts f r omexpr essi ng our natur al ar bi tr ar y wi l l .
Fur ther mor e, thi s power over a thi ng i s char acter i zed as bei ng exter nal . I t i s
our
natur al wi l l that r emai ns exter nal to thethi ng. The thi ng then r etai ns a
cer tai n measur e of sel f - subsi stence
and i ndependence, and i t r esi sts bei ng
total l y absor bed bythat wi l l .
Pr oper ty,
on
the contr ar y, i nvol ves
a
r i ghtf ul or
l awf ul r el ati on of the wi l l to the
thi ng.
Thi s
new
r el ati onshi p
i mpl i es a
suspensi on of exter nal i ty. Fr ee wi l l i s nowabl e to actual i ze i tsel f by f ul l y
penetr ati ng and satur ati ng the thi ng. The thi ng i s el i mi nated as a thi ng i n
i tsel f . I t becomes an obj ect, or what amounts to the same; the wi l l becomes
obj ecti ve i n the thi ng i tsel f . Ther e appear s to benor esi stanceto the i nvadi ng
r i ghts of the wi l l . The bar r i er s of other ness ar e
el i mi nated
and
f r ee wi l l , i n
becomi ng i ts own obj ect, attai ns i nf i ni ty.
The thi ng
whi ch
f or mer l y
conf r onted thewi l l , and whi chnowhas becomei ts pr oper ty, can keepnothi ng
f or i tsel f . As pr oper ty, i t cannot " r eser ve anythi ngpr oper f or i tsel f , wher eas i n
possessi on, as an exter nal r el ati on,
ther e r emai ned a r esi dual exter nal i ty"
( #52) .
Wi th pr oper ty
we
f i nd our sel ves beyond mer e natur al or ar bi tr ar ywi l l
and wi thi n the spher e of r i ght .
I n moder n pol i ti cal phi l osophy thi s di sti ncti on between possessi on and
pr oper tywas not pr esented abstr actl y. I ts ter ms di d not r emai n conf r onted to
one another , nor di d theyr etai n thei r l ogi cal i ndependence.
I t had r ather the
char acter of atr ansi ti on f r omoneter mto the other , f r ompossessi on
towar ds
pr oper ty
.
Pol i ti cal phi l osopher s
wer e gener al l y i nter ested i n l egi ti mati ng
pr oper ty and they thought they coul d do thi s by br i ngi ng the pr ocess of
appr opr i ati on i nto the open. I n myvi ew, i t i s cl ear that Hegel accepts
the
di sti ncti on
as moder ns do, but hi s under standi ngof i t i s suchthat i t obscur es
and
makes i t pr acti cal l yi mpossi bl etoconcei ve atr ansi ti on f r ompossessi on to
pr oper ty. I n hi s hands, thedi sti ncti on col l apses, and ther eason f or thi s i s qui te
si mpl e. One of the ter ms of the di sti ncti on, possessi on, whi chshoul d
ser ve as
the poi nt of depar tur e f or the
appr opr i ati ngpr ocess, does not r etai n a l ogi cal
space of i ts own i n Hegel ' s phi l osophi cal el abor ati on. For Hegel , possessi on i s
HEGEL
ONPOSSESSI ONANDPROPERTY
const i t ut ed byt he mani f est at i on of nat ur al wi l l as opposed t o f r ee wi l l . I t i s not
cl ear , however , whyf r ee wi l l can, whi l e ar bi t r ar y wi l l cannot , br eakt he t hi ng' s
r esi st ance. What i s t he nat ur e of t he bar r i er t hat pr ot ect s t he t hi ng f r ombei ng
sat ur at ed by nat ur al wi l l , and whi ch, at t he same t i me, seems t o di ssol ve
compl et el y i n t he pr esence of f r ee wi l l ? Si nce i t i s i nconcei vabl e t o t hi nk t hat
t he t hi ng can cont r ol and r egul at e t he r esi st ance i t pr esent s, why i s pr oper t y
not const i t ut ed i mmedi at el y, wi t hout an i nt er medi at e possessi ve st age? I n t he
absence of obj ect i ve l i mi t at i ons, what pr event s nat ur al wi l l f r om f ul l y
appr opr i at i ng t he t hi ng? These di f f i cul t i es i ndi cat e t hat possessi on cannot be
concei ved as bei ng l ogi cal l y pr i or t o pr oper t y.
The cont i nuat i on of Hegel ' s ar gument i n t hi s sect i on of t he Phi l osophyof
Ri ght shows t hat possessi on cannot be t hought of bei ng t empor al l y pr i or t o
pr oper t y. Appr opr i at i on i s now i mmedi at e, and t he possi bi l i t y of at r ansi t i on
f r om possessi on t o pr oper t y i s cancel l ed. Consi der what Hegel says i n
par agr aph #50 :
That
a
t hi ng bel ongs t o t he one who happens t o be t he
f i r st t o t ake possessi on of i t , i s bot hunder st andabl e
and a
super f i ci al det er mi nat i on: a second
per son
cannot
t ake
i nt o possessi on what
i s
al r eady ( ber ei t s) t he pr oper t y
of
anot her .
On t he one hand; i t i s cl ear f r omt hi s t ext t hat t he f i r st possessor wi l l f i nd no
obj ect i ve l i mi t at i ons i n t he t hi ng i t sel f , l i mi t at i ons whi chwoul d f or ce hi m/ her
t o mai nt ai n hi msel f / her sel f , f or an unspeci f i ed per i od of t i me, i n a st age of
mer e possessi on. When a second per son appear s, t hi s per son di scover s t hat
t he f i r st
possessor i s al r eady a pr opr i et or . When di d t hi s l at t er event t ake
pl ace? When di d t he mer e possessor of a t hi ng become i t s pr opr i et or ?
I n vi ew
of t hat absence of obj ect i ve l i mi t at i ons, t he t i me l yi ng bet ween t he possessi ve
appr ehensi on of t he f i r st possessor and t he cl ai mr ai sed byt he second per son
may
be appr oxi mat ed ad i nf i ni t um. Thi s ul t i mat el y means t hat t he f i r st
possessor
i s si mul t aneousl y t he f i r st pr opr i et or , and t hat t her ef or e
appr opr i at i on i s i mmedi at e. Ther e i s no r oom
f or a pur el y possessi ve st age
pr i or t o appr opr i at i on.
On
t he ot her hand, Hegel
does not al l ow t hat t he
second per son, who i s pr esent i ng a cl ai mon t hat same t hi ng, mayacqui r e
at
any
moment a possessi ve r el at i on wi t h i t , whi l e t he t hi ng i s st i l l t he pr oper t y of
t he f i r st "possessor " .
The t hi ng can onl y ser ve as t he t er mof one r el at i onshi p,
t he pr oper t y r el at i onshi p. Bet ween non- pr oper t yand pr oper t y
t her e can be no
i nt er medi at e st age. Possessi on i s not abl e t o asser t a concept ual space or t i me
FR. CRI STI
of i t s own. Thedi s t i nct i on bet weenpos s es s i on
and pr oper t y col l aps es i n
f avour of pr oper t y.
Onecoul d s t i l l i nt er pr et t he t ext quot ed aboveas s ayi ng t hat pr oper t y i s
cons t i t ut ed onl y when a s econd per s on appear s on t he s cene. Bef or e t hi s
s econd per s onchal l enges t hepos s es s i onhel d by t hef i r s t per s on, wear ei nt he
pr es ence of a pur el y pos s es s i ver el at i ons hi p. I t i s not aques t i on, t her ef or e, of
l ogi cal or mer et empor al pr i or i t y . Ther ei s anaddi t i onal el ement cons t i t ut ed
by t he
conf r ont at i on bet ween t wo per s ons , and i t
i s pr eci s el y
t hi s t hat
cons ol i dat es t hepos s es s i onof t hef i r s t per s onand makes i t hi s / her pr oper t y.
Pr oper t y mus t bedef i ned as t hes oci al af f i r mat i onof pos s es s i on. I npos s es s i on
wef i nd a pur el y i ndi vi dual i s t i c, monadi c r el at i ons hi p bet weenaper s onand a
t hi ng, whi l e
pr oper t y pr es uppos es
s oci al r ecogni t i on. The par agr aph t hat
i mmedi at el y f ol l ows
par agr aph #50
s eems t o conf i r mt hi s vi ew:
For t her et o be
pr oper t y, as Das ei nof per s onal i t y, i t i s not
s uf f i ci ent t hat my
i nt er nal r epr es ent at i on and wi l l
det er mi net hat s omet hi ng
s houl d bemi ne; t o s ecur et hat
end pos s es s i ve appr ehens i on ( Bes i t zer gr ei f ung) i s
r equi r ed. Thedet er mi nat ebei ng acqui r ed
her eby by t hat
wi l l , i ncl udes t he cogni zabi l i t y ( Er kennbar kei t )
i n
i t s el f
by ot her s . -That t het hi ng whi chI t akei nt o pos s es s i on
s houl d be wi t hout a mas t er i s
a s el f -evi dent negat i ve
condi t i on or r at her r el at ed t o
anant i ci pat ed r ef er encet o
anot her ( #51) . 3
Thi s t ext s eems t o s ay t hat t hecogni t i onof ot her s i s anes s ent i al r equi r ement
f or t hecons t i t ut i on of pr oper t y. Whenanot her per s oni s abl et o knowt hat a
t hi ng i s my pr oper t y, onl y t hencant hat t hi ngr i ght f ul l y becomemi ne. Pr i or t o
t hat , , ' my r el at i on t o t he t hi ng woul d have t o be mer el y pos s es s i ve
. Acl os er
cons i der at i on of t het ext i ndi cat es ,
however , t hat pos s es s i veappr ehens i oni s
not pr i or , but act ual l y f ol l ows , t he cons t i t ut i on of pr oper t y. Pr oper t y i s
gr ounded s ol el y on t he i nt er nal wi l l of a per s on and i t i s as Das ei n of
per s onal i t y t hat i t r equi r es ext er nal compl et i on,
i
. e.
t he act ual pos s es s i ve
appr ehens i onof t heal r eady
appr opr i at ed t hi ng. Pos s es s i ons er ves mer el y as
an i ndi cat i on, as anout war d
s i gnat t ached t o pr oper t y t o war not her par t i es
who may des i r e t o i nvade t hat pr evi ous l y cons t i t ut ed r i ght . Pos s es s i on
appear s nowt o be addi ng a s oci al di mens i on t o pr oper t y, whi ch i n t ur n
becomes apur el y pr i vat e r el at i on of my i nt er nal wi l l and r epr es ent at i on
t o a
t hi ng. Thepr es enceof ot her par t i es does not r epr es ent
apos i t i vecondi t i onf or
HEGEL
ONPOSSESSI ON
AND
PROPERTY
pr oper t y. Ot her per sons ar e act ual l y al ways pr esent , but i t i s a pur el y negat i ve
pr esence, t he pr esence of a non- pr esence. I t i s a condi t i on f or const i t ut i ng a
pr oper t y
r el at i onshi p t o a t hi ng t hat no
ot her
par t y act ual l y be i n a
si mi l ar
r el at i onshi p
wi t h i t . I n or der t o assur e
t he
pr esence of t he
non- pr esence of
anot her
par t y Hegel i ncl udes a condi t i on, a posi t i ve condi t i on t hi s t i me
( i
. e.
possessi ve
appr ehensi on) wher eby my pr oper t y becomes congni zabl e
t o
ot her s
.
I t shoul d be not ed t hat , at t hi s st age, Hegel i s onl y r equi r i ng cogni t i on and
not r ecogni t i on ( Aner kennung) . Recogni t i on i mpl i es t he exi st ence of ot her
per sons act i vel y i nvol ved i n t he const i t ut i onof mypr oper t y r el at i onshi ps . The
r i ght of pr oper t y l oses i t s i mmedi acy i nsof ar as my r i ght s over a t hi ng ar e
medi at ed by t he wi l l of anot her per son. Recogni t i on i s t he basi s on whi ch
st ands t he r esponsi bi l i t y of ot her s t o acknowl edge and r espect my pr oper t y.
Hegel ,
however , has been car ef ul t o poi nt out i n par agr aph #51 t hat i t i s mer e
cogni t i on
by ot her s t hat i s assur ed by possessi ve appr ehensi on. I t i s al so cl ear
t hat t hi s cogni t i on ar r i ves l at e,
t hat i s, whent he abst r act pr oper t y r el at i onshi p
bet ween mysel f and a t hi ng i s al r eady
const i t ut ed.
Hegel ' s concept i on of pr oper t y i s not
al t er ed when he f i nal l y i nt r oduces
r ecogni t i on. Thi s he does i n t he
par agr aph t hat mar ks t he t r ansi t i on f r omt he
spher e of pr oper t y t o t hat of cont r act .
Dasei n, as det er mi nat e bei ng, i s essent i al l y bei ng f or
anot her . Pr oper t y, i nsof ar as i t i s Dasei n as ext er nal
t hi ng,
i s f or ot her ext er nal i t i es and i t i s connect ed wi t h
necessi t y andcont i ngency
. But , as Dasei n of t he wi l l , i t i s
onl y f or t he wi l l
of anot her per son. Thi s r el at i on of wi l l t o
wi l l i s t he pr oper
and t r ue gr ound i n whi ch f r eedomhas
Dasei n. Thi s medi at i onconst i t ut es t he
spher e of cont r act ,
namel y t he f act t hat I hol d pr oper t y not mer el y by means
of a t hi ng and mysubj ect i ve wi l l , but by means of anot her
per son' s
wi l l as wel l and so by means of a common wi l l
( #71) .
Pr oper t y
const i t ut es t he Dasei n of f r eedom. Fr eedommust t her ef or e be
char act er i zed as bei ng
essent i al l y f or anot her . We have al r eady seen t hat
i nsof ar as a t hi ng becomes t he pr oper t y
of a per son, i t l oses i t s sel f - subsi st ence
and i ndependence, t hus becomi ng
essent i al l y f or anot her . I n t hi s case t he
r ef er ence i s a per son. Yet , Hegel per cei ves t wo ot her
possi bl e r ef er ences . On
t he one hand, t her e
i s a pur el y nat ur al r ef er ence, accor di ng t o whi cha t hi ng, as
t he pr oper t y of a per son,
r et ai ns i t s mat er i al i t y, and t her ef or e i t s nat ur al
FR. CRI STI
connect i ons of necessi t y and cont i ngency wi t h ot her ext er nal t hi ngs . On t he
ot her hand, t her e i s ar ef er ence t hat does not consi der so much t he t hi ngt hat
has become my pr oper t y, but my pr oper t y over t hat
t hi ng. Thi s i s pr oper t y as
"Dasei n of t he wi l l ". I can become
a pr opr i et or , i . e. my wi l l can at t ai n
excl usi ve r i ght t o use, enj oy or di spose
of a t hi ng, when I amr ecogni zed as
such by anot her par t y. Thus, I ama pr opr i et or
"f or t he wi l l
of
anot her
per son. " I hol d pr oper t y not as an abst r act
wi l l any mor e, but my wi l l i s
medi at ed by t he r ecogni t i on of anot her par t y . Hegel
has nowmoved t o t he
spher e of cont r act . Sur el y, I do not havet o wai t
f or t he r ecogni t i on of anot her
per son ( or per sons) t o become t he pr opr i et or
of a t hi ng. Ther e i s a pr e-
cont r act ual st age wi t hi n whi chpr oper t y i s sol el y const i t ut edby t he r el at i on
of
my subj ect i ve wi l l t o a t hi ng. When t he t r ansi t i on i s made t o cont r act ual
pr oper t y, r ecogni t i on becomes essent i al , f or "cont r act pr esupposes t hat
t he
par t i es i nvol ved r ecogni ze t hemsel ves as per sons and pr opr i et or s" ( #71) .
The di st i nct i on bet ween possessi on and pr oper t y sur f aces agai n i n t he
spher e of cont r act . I t i s
pr esent ed i n exact l y t he same t er ms as i t appear edi n
par agr aph #51 . Possessi on
nowconst i t ut es a pur e st i pul at i on, a cer emoni al
compl et i on f or t he cont r act ual
r el at i on :
The di st i nct i on bet ween pr oper t y and possessi on . . .
becomes i n t he spher e of cont r act t he di st i nct i on bet ween
t he common wi l l as covenant and i t s act ual i zat i on as
per f or mance ( Lei st ung) ( #78) .
Possessi on shoul d not be t aken as an i nt er medi at e st at i on bet ween non-
pr oper t y andpr oper t y. Pr oper t y, accor di ngt o Hegel , i s ani mmedi at er el at i on
bet ween a per son anda
t hi ng. Ther e i s no pl ace f or a possessi ve
r el at i onshi p
est abl i shed pr i or t o pr oper t y.
I n
moder n pol i t i cal phi l osophy t he not i on of possessi on i s t i ed, i n t he l ast
anal ysi s, t o t hat of t he st at e of nat ur e.
I n t he Phi l osophy of Ri ght Hegel , at
l east i ni t i al l y, admi t s suchaconnect i onby associ at i ng
possessi onwi t hnat ur al
wi l l . Even t hough he f i nds a pl ace
f or nat ur al wi l l i n hi s pol i t i cal t heor y, he
f or sakes t he not i on of t he st at e
of nat ur e. I n moder n t hought t hi s not i on
ser vedas abasi s onwhi ch
t o st andpol i t i cal soci et y . I t gener al l y r epr esent ed an
or i gi nal
pr e- pol i t i cal st at e of af f ai r s char act er i zed by t he exi st ence of equal
i ndi vi dual s wi t h a capaci t y
t o expr ess t hei r own par t i cul ar desi r es and wi l l s
HEGEL
ONPOSSESSION
AND
PROPERTY
wi t hout hi ndr ances . Thepar t i cul ar i t y of t hei r wi l l s was not hamper ed by any
f or mof uni ver sal i t y havi ng r egul at or y power over t hem. Thi s st at e of nat ur e
meant , i n gener al , a sor t of ver i t abl e anar chy, qual i f i ed and measur ed di ver sel y
accor di ng t o di f f er ent aut hor s . Hegel ' s endeavour i s ai med at maki ng t hi s
not i on per f ect l y di spensabl e. The col l apse of t he di st i nct i on bet ween
possessi on and pr oper t y and t he di mi ni shed st at us assi gned t o possessi on
must
be
seen
as a
mani f est at i on of t hat same endeavour .
NowI t ur n t o a summar y di scussi on of t he f at e of t he di st i nct i on bet ween
possessi on and pr oper t y i n Rousseau, Fi cht e and Kant . 4
The di st i nct i on bet ween possessi on and pr oper t y and t he ascr i pt i on of
possessi on t o t he st at e of nat ur e ar e vi si bl e f eat ur es of Rousseau' s pol i t i cal
phi l osophy. In The Soci al Cont r act ( 1762) , Rousseau di st i ngui shes bet ween
possessi on and pr oper t y, assi gni ng t he f or mer t o t he st at e of nat ur e, wher e
human bei ngs enj oy nat ur al f r eedom, and t he l at t er t o ci vi l soci et y, t he r eal m
of ci vi l l i ber t y . Possessi onr esul t s f r omt he " ef f ect of f or ce and t he r i ght of t he
f i r st occupi er . " ' It i s a sol i t ar y r el at i onshi p bet ween a per son andat hi ngwi t h
no mani f est at i on of acommonwi l l . Pr oper t y, on t he cont r ar y, pr esupposes a
common wi l l and as such i t " can onl y be f ounded on a posi t i ve t i t l e.
" 6
Rousseau consi der s pr oper t y as " t he most sacr ed of al l r i ght s of ci t i zenshi p. " '
Yet , f or al l i t s sanct i t y, i t does not const i t ut e anat ur al r i ght . Humanbei ngs do
not have t hi s r i ght i n t he st at e of nat ur e wher e t hey can onl y at t ai n mer e
possessi on of ext er nal t hi ngs . Rousseau, f ur t her mor e, per cei ves t hat behi nd
t hi s sacr ed r i ght t her e l i es " cl ever usur pat i on. " 8 Thi s i nduces hi mt o set
l i mi t at i ons t o t hi s r i ght . The sover ei gnt y of t he gener al wi l l , whi ch st ands
above i t , can cer t ai nl y anni hi l at e i t . 9 The r i ght of pr oper t y ceases t o be an
absol ut e r i ght of t he i ndi vi dual . It i s nowcondi t i oned by t he r equi r ement t hat
" no ci t i zen shal l ever be weal t hy enough t o buy anot her , and none poor
enough t o be f or ced t o sel l hi msel f . " 1
Fol l owi ng
Rousseau ver y cl osel y, Fi cht e, i n hi s. Gr undl agedes Nat ur r echt s
( 179 6/ 7) , al so di st i ngui shes bet ween possessi on and
pr oper t y. " In t he
backgr ound one can cl ear l y di scer n t he not i on of t he st at e of nat ur e.
Accor di ng t o Fi cht e, wi t hi n t he st at e of nat ur e human bei ngs can onl y be
consi der ed as per sons, not
as
i ndi vi dual s
.
A
per son' s r el at i on t o t he wor l d i n
t he st at e of nat ur e i s a pur el y
possessi ve one. It i s onl y when i ndi vi dual s
emer ge i nt o a st at e of cont r act ual r i ght t hat t hey can
at t ai n pr oper t y. Thus,
pr oper t y i s not a nat ur al r i ght , and i t can onl y be gr ounded on t he
r eci pr ocal
r ecogni t i on of i ndi vi dual s .
When man i s posi t ed i n r el at i on t o ot her s, hi s possessi on
becomes r i ght f ul ( r echt l i che) onl y i nsof ar
as he i s
r ecogni zed by ot her s. In t hi s manner , he at t ai ns f or t he
FR. CRISTI
f i r s t t i me ext er nal common l egi t i mat i on, common t ohi m
and t he par t i es t hat r ecogni ze hi m. Thus pos s es s i on
becomes pr oper t y f or t he f i r s t t i me, i . e. s omet hi ng
i ndi vi dual .
1 2
Ther e i s nos pace f or pr e- cont r act ual pr oper t y. Pr oper t y cannot be concei ved
of as an abs ol ut e r i ght . It i s gr ounded on a s oci al cont r act whi ch i mpos es
l i mi t at i ons on t hat r i ght . Thi s means t hat I can hol d a cer t ai n amount of
pr oper t y "on condi t i on t hat al l ci t i zens can make a l i vi ng ont hei r own. Ci vi l
pr oper t y i s cancel l ed when ci t i zens cannot l i ve on t hei r own; i t becomes t hei r
pr oper t y. Obvi ous l y, t hi s mus t be det er mi ned by t he power of t he s t at e.
"1 3
Thi s i s a cl ear expr es s i on of J acobi ni s mont he par t of Fi cht e. Hi s l i ber al vi ews
of ear l i er year s
have nowt aken a s har p t ur n t owar dr adi cal democr acy
.
1 4 It i s
i n t hes e concl us i ons t hat we can per cei ve t he r evol ut i onar y pos s i bi l i t i es of t he
di s t i nct i on bet ween pos s es s i on and pr oper t y.
Kant , i n hi s
Met aphys i kder Si t t en ( 1 797) , was
per haps t he f i r s t t o per cei ve
phi l os ophi cal l y t he J acobi n cons equences i mpl i ci t i n t he di s t i nct i on bet ween
pos s es s i on andpr oper t y i n moder n pol i t i cal phi l os ophy. Kant s ees nopoi nt i n
r ej ect i ng t he di s t i nct i on bet ween a s t at e of nat ur e anda s t at e of r i ght or ci vi l
s t at e. Agai n, f ol l owi ng Rous s eau, heas s oci at es owner s hi p i . e. pr oper t y, wi t h
t he s t at e of r i ght . "Tohave s omet hi ng ext er nal as one' s own ( das Sei ne) i s
pos s i bl e onl y i n a s t at e of r i ght , under a publ i cl egi s l at i ve power , i . e. i n a ci vi l
s t at e . "'
S
Thi s t hes i s , however , i s i mmedi at el y f ol l owed by one whi chext ends
pr oper t y t ot he s t at e of nat ur e. Kant s t at es : "In t he s t at e of nat ur e t her e canbe
a r eal , i f onl y pr ovi s i onal ext er nal owner s hi p ( Mei n and Dei n) .
" I 6
Kant ' s
demons t r at i on of t hi s l at t er t hes i s i s ext r emel y i nt er es t i ng becaus e i t pr e-
f i gur es Hegel ' s s t andpoi nt i n t he Phi l os ophy of Ri ght . If Hegel ' s ai mi n t hi s
wor kcan be s ai d t o cons i s t , i n t he l as t anal ys i s , i n a r ef ut at i on of Rous s eau' s
and Fi cht e' s r adi cal democr at i c pos t ur e, t hen Kant i s s ur el y i t s i mmedi at e
ant ecedent .
Nat ur al r i ght i n t he s t at e of a ci vi l cons t i t ut i on . . . cannot
s uf f er at t acks f r oms t at ut or y l aws . Thus , t he f ol l owi ng
l egal pr i nci pl e mai nt ai ns i t s val i di t y: "Whoever f ol l ows
t he maxi maccor di ng t owhi chi t i s i mpos s i bl e f or me t o
ownt he obj ect of my ar bi t r ar y wi l l ( Wi l l kr i i r ) , does i nj ur y
t ome" . For t he ci vi l cons t i t ut i on i s onl y t he s t at e of r i ght ,
t hr ough whi ch owner s hi p ( das Sei ne) i s mer el y s ecur ed
( ges i cher t ) , but not , pr oper l y s peaki ng, cons t i t ut ed and
det er mi ned. 1 7
HEGELONPOSSESSI ONANDPROPERTY
Ownershi p whi ch i s secured by ri ght , i n ot her words, propert y, i s not
const i t ut ed and det ermi ned onl y whenone moves t owards t hesphereof ri ght .
Ont he cont rary, i t i s const i t ut ed and det ermi ned wi t h pri ori t y i n t he st at e of
nat ure. The st at e of ri ght poses onl y a guarant ee t hat one' s propert y wi l l be
respect ed. "Aguarant ee", says Kant , "presupposes one' s ownershi p
. "'
8
Fi rml y
anchored wi t hi n t he st at e of nat ure, propert y cannot suf f er at t acks f rom
posi t i ve l egi sl at i on. Movi ng away f romRousseau and Fi cht e, Kant has
rehabi l i t at ed propert y as a nat ural ri ght .
Theref ore, pri or t o t he ci vi l const i t ut i on, ownershi p must
be regarded as possi bl e. Ari ght t o compel everyone wi t h
whomwe coul d engage i n any sort of t rade t o ent er wi t h
us i n aconst i t ut i on where ownershi p i s secured, must al so
be regarded as possi bl e. 1 9
On t hi s basi s Kant i s abl e t o di st i ngui sh bet ween a provi si onal l y- ri ght f ul
possessi on and a perempt ory possessi on. Thef i rst one occurs i n t he st at e of
nat ure, whi cht heref ore, by def i ni t i on, presupposes t hepossi bi l i t y of ast at eof
ri ght . Provi si onal l y- ri ght f ul possessi on i s an ant i ci pat i on of and preparat i on
f or perempt ory possessi on and i t can onl y be concei ved of under a ci vi l
const i t ut i on. Perempt ory possessi on ( whi ch coi nci des wi t hHegel ' s not i on
of
propert y as ri ght f ul possessi on) , f ol l ows upon provi si onal l y- ri ght f ul
possessi on, perf ect i ng i t . Yet , i n a cert ai n respect , t he l at t er presupposes t he
f ormer .
Kant recogni zes t hat t he t ransi t i ont o t hest at eof ri ght i s pref i gured i n
t he st at e of nat ure. The st at e of nat ure
i s pot ent i al l y a st at e of ri ght . I n t he
f ormer I st andas a mere persondef i ned onl y
bymypart i cul ari t y, but bef oreI
become i nvol ved i n any sort of ci vi l i nt ercourse wi t h ot her
persons, t he
possi bi l i t y of such a si t uat i on precedes i t s act ual i zat i on. Thi s const i t ut es my
ri ght t o compel ot hers who are al so wi l l i ng t o ent er i nt o a ci vi l si t uat i on i nt o
whi ch I wi l l al so
be drawn, t o recogni ze t hei r ownci vi l wi l l , vi z. t he wi l l t o
recogni ze meas asubj ect of ri ght s
.
When
t hi s t akes pl ace one canbesuret hat a
st at e of ri ght has emerged wi t hi n t he st at e of nat ure.
Kant i s caref ul t o mai nt ai n t he di st i nct i on bet ween t hest at e of nat ure and
t he st at e of ri ght at al l cost s. Heprevent s t hei r col l apsei nt o oneanot her byhi s
useof t he not i on "provi si onal ", so t hat t hest at e of nat uremust be t hought of
as onl y "provi si onal l y" bei ng a st at e of ri ght . I n order t o st rengt hen t hi s
di st i nct i on Kant subsequent l ybri ngs f ort h aconcept i on of t he st at eof ri ght as
i deal l y present i n t hest at e of nat ure
.
Thi s becomes
mani f est
whenhe expl ai ns
t hereasonwhyt here can be acqui si t i on of propert y wi t hi nt hest at e of nat ure.
I f t he st at e of nat ure i s def i ned as a pri vat i on, i . e. t he pri vat i on of ri ght ,
FR. CRI STI
evi dent l y no pr oper t y quar i ght f ul
possessi on can ar i se wi t hi n i t . Yet , t he st at e
of nat ur e cont ai ns t he
i dea of a ci vi l st at e, so t hat pr oper t y i ndeed
can be
acqui r ed pr ovi si onal l y
wi t hi n i t .
The st at e of auni ver sal , r eal , uni f i ed wi l l t ol egi sl at e
i s t he
ci vi l
st at e. And i t i s onl y i n conf or mi t y wi t h t he
i dea of a
ci vi l
st at e, i . e. i n vi ewof i t and i t s r eal i zat i on, but pr i or
t o
i t s r eal i t y
. .
.
t hat somet hi ng ext er nal can be acqui r ed
or i gi nal l y, even i f onl y pr ovi si onal l y . Per empt or y
acqui si t i on t akes pl ace i n t he ci vi l st at e excl usi vel y . 2 0
Kant
has been abl e t o t r ace t he ci vi l st at e, and t her ef or e
t he r i ght of
pr oper t y,
back t o t he st at e of nat ur e. Thi s i s a much f i r mer
gr ound t han t he
pur el y
convent i onal one admi t t ed by Rousseauand Fi cht e.
St i l l , t he f act t hat
Kant
i s r eady t o def i ne pr oper t y as mer el y pr ovi si onal i n such
ast at e, det r act s
f r om
i t s sanct i t y and weakens i t wi t h r espect t opossi bl e
at t acks ar i si ng f r om
t he ci vi l st at e t hr ough
i t s posi t i ve l egi sl at i on. The door opened up by
Rousseauand Fi cht e t o
st at e- i mposed l i mi t at i ons of t he r i ght of pr oper t y and
expr opr i at i on, has been l ef t nowonl y semi - cl osed
by Kant . 2 1
Twent y- t hr ee
year s l at er , when Pr ussi a was movi ng
away f r omi t s r ef or m
er a, and ver y
r api dl y so, especi al l y i f one consi der s t he
r eact i onar y nat ur e of
t he Car l sbad
decr ees ( 1 81 9) , Hegel st r i ves t o cl ose t hi s
door compl et el y,
el i mi nat i ng any
condi t i ons t hat may weaken t he r i ght of
pr oper t y
. 2 2
I n hi s
syst emt hi s r i ght
i s nowdef ended as an absol ut e r i ght of per sonal i t y ( cf . #44)
.
I t i s t hi s asser t i on t hat
pr oduces t he col l apse of t he di st i nct i on bet ween
possessi on and
pr oper t y t hat was pr esent ed i n t he f i r st par t of t hi s essay. Hegel
has
t hus def i ni t el y moved away f r om
Rousseau and Fi cht e, f or whom
possessi on
r el at ed t o i sol at ed per sons, whi l e pr oper t y
was ul t i mat el y soci al l y
condi t i oned
. , Pr oper t y, as t he absol ut e r i ght of per sonal i t y,
pr ecedes al l
cont r act ual r el at i onshi ps
. Kant i ni t i at ed an appr oxi mat i on t owar ds
pr e-
cont r act ual pr oper t y. Movi ng
t owar ds Locke, and away f r omHobbes, Kant
ar gues t hat a st at e of nat ur e
i s not opposed t o a soci al st at e. 2 3 I t i s onl y
opposed
t o a ci vi l st at e, so t hat t he st at e of nat ur e i s now
def i ned by a mer e
absence of
di st r i but i ve j ust i ce. 2 4 As a soci al st at e i t pr esupposes t he
exi st ence
wi t hi n i t of commut at i ve
j ust i ce. St i l l , by r et ai ni ng t he opposi t i on bet ween a
st at e of nat ur e and ast at e of r i ght , Kant l eaves
undet er mi ned t he quest i on of
t he degr ee
of aut onomy al l owed t o pr i vat e pr oper t y wi t hi n
t he pr ej ur i di cal
spher e. Thus, apur el y nat ur al and soci al st at e, as opposed t oaj ur i di cal one,
does not const i t ut e a suf f i ci ent
saf eguar d agai nst possi bl e i nt er f er ences
1 2 0
HEGELONPOSSESSI ONANDPROPERTY
emanat i ng f romt he general wi l l , and i n part i cul ar, agai nst t he menace
of
soci al i sm.
I t i s f or
t hese reasons t hat Hegel chooses t odi scardt henot i onof t hest at e
of
nat ure, 2 5 or what amount s t o t he same, t odi ssol ve t he
ri gi d
separat i on
t hat
had been general l y est abl i shed bet ween t hi s not i onand
t hat
of a
st at e of ri ght ,
whereby each of t hemwas underst ood as t hemat i cal l y i ndependent
and
aut onomous . Asi mi l ar si t uat i on i s vi si bl e i n
Locke' s pol i t i cal phi l osophy.
Locke ascri bes t oi ndi vi dual s l i vi ng wi t hi n t he st at e of nat urean absol ut e
and
unl i mi t ed propert y ri ght . Onl y t he di f f i cul t i es of enf orci ng such ari ght wi t hi n
t he st at e of nat ure f orces i ndi vi dual s t o movet owards ci vi l soci et y, where no
new ri ght s are creat ed. 2 6 Locke' s concept i on of t he st at e of nat ure i s t hus
i nt ernal l y rel at ed t o t hat of a st at e of ri ght . Thef usi on of t heset wonot i ons i s
concret el y represent ed i n Hegel ' s t hought by hi s not i on of ci vi l soci et y. 2 7
Hegel present s i t f romt he st art as presupposi ngt he abst ract ri ght s of persons
and as domi nat ed, consequent l y, by t he pri nci pl e of part i cul ari t y. Af ormof
uni versal i t y
devel ops
wi t hi n ci vi l soci et y i nt egrat i ng t he part i cul ar ai ms and
cent ri f ugal i nt erest s of al l i ndi vi dual s . Thi s devel opment cul mi nat es
predi ct abl y i n an admi ni st rat i on of j ust i ce t hrough whi ch ri ght becomes l aw
( #2 17 ) , sot hat whenHegel l eaves ci vi l soci et y behi ndandascends t ohi s St at e,
no new ri ght s are creat ed.
Hegel ' s versi on of t he st at e of nat ure, vi z. hi s not i on of ci vi l soci et y, i s
al ready a st at e of ri ght , i nsof ar as i t presupposes t he abst ract ri ght of
i ndi vi dual s . For Hegel , t he basi c ri ght of i ndi vi dual s i s t heri ght of propert y. I t
i s a pre- cont ract ual ri ght andhe t akes i t as t he absol ut e poi nt of depart ure i n
hi s exposi t i on. Propert y i s ri ght f ul l y grounded on t he absol ut e wi l l of t he
i ndi vi dual person. 2 8 An absol ut el y f ree wi l l abst ract s f romal l rel at i ons t o
ot her part i es
;
al l
i t s possi bl e rel at i ons t o ot her wi l l s si mpl y col l apse. At t hi s
st age wehave onl y t he f reedomof anabst ract wi l l , t hat i s, "t he f reedomof an
i ndi vi dual ( ei nzel nen) person whi chi s rel at ed onl y t o hi msel f ' ( #40) . The f i rst
ext ernal i zat i on of such a wi l l i s not di rect l y t owards ot her person( s) , but
t owards ext ernal t hi ngs . Propert y t hus becomes t he"f i rst Dasei nof f reedom"
( #45 ) , andast at e of ri ght can spri ngout wi t hout medi at i ons f romt hi s not i on
of absol ut e f reewi l l . Hegel def i nes ri ght si mpl y as "Dasei n of f ree wi l l " ( #2 9) .
Si nce Hegel i s consi deri ngt heunmedi at ed, absol ut ef reedomof t hei ndi vi dual
as t he pri mordi al det ermi nat i on of ri ght , t he det ermi nat i on of propert y
becomes a purel y
subj ect i ve and non- soci al rel at i on of t he i ndi vi dual t ot he
ext ernal worl d. Hegel ' s t heoryof precont ract ual propert y i n hi s
Phi l osophy of
Ri ght shoul dt heref ore be consi deredas one of t he most radi cal f ormul at i ons
of possessi ve i ndi vi dual i smi n modern pol i t i cal phi l osophy.
Phi l osophy
Uni versi dad de Chi l e
Uni versi t y of Toront o
FR. CRI STI
Notes
l .

Shl omo Avi ner i
i nter pr ets Hegel ' s vi ews i n the Real phi l osophi e ( 1805/ 6) as suppor ti ng a
concepti on of pr oper ty
as " tr ans- subj ecti ve" and " non- i ndi vi dual " . He states: " pr oper ty
per tai ns
to the per son as r ecogni zed by other s, i t can never be an i ntr i nsi c qual i ty
of the
i ndi vi dual pi or to
hi s r ecogni ti on by other s. Whi l e possessi on r el ates to the i ndi vi dual ,
pr oper ty
r el ates to soci ety; si nce possessi on becomes pr oper ty thr ough the other s'
r ecogni ti on of i t
as such, pr oper ty i s a soci al attr i bute. " Fr omthi s basi cal l y cor r ect
i nter pr etati on
of theyoung Hegel . Avi ner i wr ongl y concl udes: " Thus not an i ndi vi dual i sti c
but a soci al pr emi se
i s at the r oot of Hegel ' s concept of pr oper ty, andpr oper ty wi l l never be
abl eto achi eve an i ndependent statur e i n hi s system. . . Pr oper ty al ways r emai ns pr emi ssed
on soci al
consensus, on consci ousness, not on the mer ef act of possessi on" ( my emphasi s) .
Hegel ' s
Theor y of the Moder n State, Cambr i dge: Uni ver si ty Pr ess, 1972, pp. 88- 9.
Thi s essay i s i ntended
to showthat i t i s an i ndi vi dual i sti c pr emi se that i s at the r oot of
Hegel ' s
concept of pr oper ty i n the Phi l osophy of Ri ght and that Avi ner i i s not j usti f i ed i n
extendi ng the themes
and sol uti ons of the young Hegel tohi s matur ewor k. I ndeed, Hegel ' s
noti on of
possessi on and pr oper ty i n the Real phi l osophi e I I , and f or that matter i n the
Phi l osophi sche
Pr opadeuti k ( 1809/ 11) , ed. Gl ockner , vol . I I I , p. 60, does di f f er
f undamental l y f r omthat pr oposed i n the Phi l osophy of Ri ght ( 1820) .
2 .

Al l number edpar agr aphs cor r espondtothePhi l osophy of Ri ght . I n the tr ansl ati onof these
texts I haveconsul tedextensi vel y the wor ks of Si r Mal col mKnox andJ uan Lui s Ver mal .
Cf. Hegel ' s Phi l osophy of Ri ght, tr ansl ated wi th notes by T. M. Knox, Oxf or d: Cl ar endon,
1967; and G. W. F. Hegel , Pr i nci pi os del a Fi l osof ta del Der echo, tr ansl ated byJ . L. Ver mal ,
Buenos Ai r es: Sudamer i cana,
1975.
3 .

Knox and Ver mal tr ansl ate Er kennbar kei t usi ng r especti vel y the ter ms
" r ecogni zabi l i ty"
and " r econoci bl e" . Thesetr ansl ati ons obscur e the di sti ncti on between mer e
cogni ti on and
r ecogni ti on.
4.

H. B. Acton, noti ci ng that Fi chte' s Gr undl age des Natur r echts
appear ed bef or e Kant' s
Metaphysi k der Si tten, wr i tes that " the conventi onal way of wr i ti ng the hi stor y of
phi l osophy, i n whi chthe vi ews
of each f amous phi l osopher ar e pr esented as a conti nuous
whol eandeachphi l osopher i s di scussedaf ter hi s " pr edecessor s" andbef or e
hi s" successor s" ,
can beser i ousl ymi sl eadi ng. " G. W. F. , Natur al Law,
I ntr oducti on by H. B. Acton, Uni ver si ty
of Pennsyl vani a Pr ess, 1975, p. 28.
5.

The Soci al
Contr act, i n The Soci al Contr act and Di scour ses, tr ans. by G. D. H. Col e,
London: Dent, 1975, p . 178.
6.

I bi d. , p . 178.
7.

A Di scour se on Pol i ti cal Economy, i n i bi d. , p. 138.
8.

A Di scour se
on the Or i gi n of I nequal i ty, i n i bi d. , p. 89.
9.

Cf. Emi l e, i n i bi d. p .
303 .
10.

The Soci al Contr act, i n i bi d. , p. 204.
11.

Fi chte
appr oxi mates Rousseau to Locke. He i nter pr ets Rousseau as mai ntai ni ng a natur al
r i ght of pr oper ty,
that i s, " a r i ght of pr oper ty bef or ethe soci al contr act" - Gr undl agedes
Natur r echts, i n Sammtl i che Wer ke, Ber l i n: Ver l age
von
Vei t
and Comp. , vol . I I I , p. 204,
note. Fi chte i s not consi der i ng Rousseau' s cl ear
di sti ncti on between possessi on andpr oper ty
i n The Soci al Contr act .
122
12.

I bi d. , p. 130.
13.

I bi d. , p. 213.
14.

Cf. Manfred Buhr, Revol ut i on and Phi l osophi e. Di e Ursprungl i che Phi l osophi e J ohann
Got t l i eb Fi cht es and di e Franzosi sche Revol ut i on, Berl i n: Deut scher Verl ag der
Wi ssenschaft en, 1965, pp. 63- 71.
15.

Di e Met aphysi k der Si t t en, i n Werke, edi t ed by E. Cassi rer Berl i n: B. Cassi rer, 1916, vol .
VI I , p. 58.
16.

I bi d. , p. 59.
17.

I bi d. , p. 59.
18.

I bi d. , p. 59.
19.

I bi d. , p.
59.
20. I bi d. , p. 68.
21 .

Vi l l ey, for i nst ance, bel i eves t hat Kant ' s t heory of propert y i s, i nt hel ast anal ysi s, conduci ve
t o soci al i sm: "Ons' i magi ne t i rer de Kant unedoct ri net r8s affi rmat i vedel a propri et 6pri vee:
Kant d6cri vant , approuvant fordre de son t emps, a pri s soi n de marquer fort ement
I ' ant 6ri ori t 6 aHt at de 1' appropri at i on pri vee, mai s aussi t ot i l reconnai t quecet t epropri et e
de "droi t pri v6", de "droi t nat urel ", nest que "provi soi re". Quand l e droi t devi endra
p6rempt oi re, aHt at sera reconnu undroi t emi nent sur t ous l es bi ens des ci t oyens, et ce
pri nci pe peut nous condui re t out aussi bi en au soci al i sme. " Mi chel Vi l l ey, "Kant dans
I ' Hi st oi re du Droi t ", i n
La Phi l osophi e Pol i t i que de Kant ( Annal es de Phi l osophi e
Pol i t i que) , Pari s : Presses Uni versi t ai res de France, 1962, p.
60,
not e
I .
Adi fferent
vi ewi s
expressed by Saage.
Cf.
Ri chard
Saage,
Ei gent um,
St aat and Gesel l schaft bei I mmanuel
Kant , St ut t gart : W. Kohl hammer, 1973, p. 39.
22.

The
ant i democrat i c nat ureof Hegel ' s Phi l osophy of Ri ght has been reserved by I l t i ng ( Cf.
K
. - H. I l t i ng, "The St ruct ureof Hegel ' s Phi l osophyofRi ght , " i nZ. A
. Pel czynski ,
ed. ,
Hegel ' s
Pol i t i cal Phi l osophy, Cambri dge: Uni versi t y Press, 1971, pp.
90- 110,
t o hi s concept i on of a
sel f- perpet uat i ng monarch, concei ved as t heapex and begi nni ng of t hewhol e. I t shoul d be
st ressed t hat Hegel ' s not i on of propert y i s al so ant i democrat i c i nsofar as hewi l l not al l owi t
t o be regul at ed by t he pri nci pl e of equal i t y ( cf. #49) . Not much shoul d be made of hi s
assert i on i n paragraph #46 t hat "t he det ermi nat i ons concerni ng propert y mayhavet o be
subordi nat ed t o hi gher spheres of ri ght , asoci et y or t hest at e. " Thi s has not hi ng t o do wi t h
t hel i mi t ed redi st ri but i ve funct i on recogni zed l at er by Hegel when deal i ng wi t h
t hest at e as
Pol i zei . Furt hermore,
t hese hi gher spheres
of ri ght
canrul e
onl y
when commonownershi p
has been i nst i t ut ed. But commonownershi pper se cannot bel ong t o t hesphere of abst ract
ri ght , whi ch i s purel y i ndi vi dual ri ght . I t i s because of t hi s t hat Hegel present s common
ownershi pas purel y except i onal i nsofar as i t i s a "communi t yt hat i s i nherent l y di ssol ubl e",
so t hat t he pri vat e propert y of each i ndi vi dual ' s share can al ways be recovered.
23.

Kant , op. ci t . , p. 112- 113.
24. I bi d. , p. 113.
HEGELONPOSSESSI ONAND
PROPERTY
25.

The not i on of
a st at e of nat ure ( Nai urzust and) i s barel y ment i oned i n t he Phi l osophy of
Ri ght . Andwheni t i s ment i oned i t i s onl y a margi nal use, not det ermi ned by t hest ruct ureof
hi s t hought . I t i s i nt erest i ng t o not e t hat i n t he Enzykl opadi e ( 1817) #1415 and ( 1830) #502,
123
FR. CRISTI
and i n t he pr ef ace t o hi s Vor l esung
1818/ 9 ( accor di ng t ot henot es of Car l Gust avHomeyer ),
Hegel st i l l assi gns t o t he Nat ur zust and
a cl ear l y def i nedandi ndependent concept ual pl ace.
It i s al so si gni f i cant t hat i n
t he Vor l esung 1818/ 9 Hegel does not st r ess t he aut onomyof pr e-
cont r act ual pr oper t y
( Hr . 1137), as he does i n t he Phi l osophy of Ri ght . Thi s
l ends f ur t her
conf i r mat i on t o t he uni que
char act er of t he Phi l osophy of Ri ght , as has beendi scer ned by
Il t i ng. G. W. F. Hegel ,
Vor l esungen f i ber Recht sphi l osophi e 1818- 1831. Edi t i on and
comment ar y by K. - H. Il t i ng,
Bad Canst at t : Fr omann- Hol zboog, 1973 .
26.

Cf. C. B. Macpher son,
The Pol i t i cal Theor y of Possessi ve Indi vi dual i sm, London: Oxf or d
Uni ver si t y Pr ess,
1964, pp. 210 and 218.
27.

Hegel ' s
def i ni t i on of ci vi l soci et y i n par agr aph #1289 ( " ci vi l soci et y i s t he
bat t l ef i el d of t he
i ndi vi dual
pr i vat e i nt er est of al l agai nst al l " ) f ol l ows Hobbes' descr i pt i on of t he st at e
of
nat ur e
al most wor d f or wor d.
28. Cf.
Pet er Landau, " Hegel s Begr undung des Ver t r agsr echt s" , i n Mat er i al i en
zu Hegel s
Recht sphi l osophi e, edi t . by Manf r ed Ri edel , Fr ankf ur t : Suhr kamp,
1973, p. 180: " Bi s zur
Begr undungdes Pr i vat ei gent ums gel angt
Hegel al l ei n auf gr undder Anal yse des Recht s der
ei nzel nen Per son; ohne Ber ucksi cht i gung der
Aner kennung dur ch ander e Per sonen. " Cf
t oo Ri char d Tei chgr aeber , " Hegel on
Pr oper t y and Pover t y, " J our nal of t he Hi st or y of
Ideas, vol . 38, J n. - Mr . 1977, p.
54
.